The Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition by Madhab Chandra Pradhan and others challenging the denial to recall a minor victim for re-examination in a POCSO case. This decision upholds the protection of child victims in sexual offense cases.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a landmark ruling that reinforces the protection of child victims involved in sexual offense cases, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a Special Leave Petition. The petition was filed by Madhab Chandra Pradhan and others against the State of Odisha, challenging the judgments of the High Court of Orissa and the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Nayagarh. The primary issue in contention was the denial of a request to recall a minor victim for re-examination as a witness.
Case Background and Allegations
The origins of the case trace back to Special G.R. which itself stemmed from FIR No. 245 of 2020. The petitioners, including Madhab Chandra Pradhan, faced serious charges under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the POCSO Act. Specifically, they were accused of offenses under Sections 363, 366, 376(2), and 109 read with Section 34 of the IPC, along with Sections 4, 6, and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
The allegations against the petitioners were grave. Petitioner No. 2 was accused of kidnapping a minor girl, forcibly marrying her, and subjecting her to sexual assault over a prolonged period. The victim was eventually rescued by her parents and law enforcement authorities on November 18, 2020.
Rejection of Re-Examination Request
The legal battle intensified when the petitioners filed an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), seeking to recall the minor victim for re-examination. This request was promptly rejected by the Special Court on October 10, 2023. The court cited Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act, emphasizing the provision that a child should not be repeatedly called to testify, a measure designed to protect the victim from additional psychological trauma.
Subsequently, the petitioners appealed to the High Court of Orissa. However, the High Court upheld the Special Court’s decision, reiterating the POCSO Act’s legislative intent to safeguard child victims at all stages of the judicial process.
Key Observations
The case reached the Supreme Court, where a bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah heard the petition. The apex court, in its ruling, upheld the judgments of the lower courts, emphasizing the critical importance of Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act. The court noted that this statutory mandate is crucial for preventing the re-traumatization of child victims.
The Supreme Court observed that-
“the child should not be summoned to testify in court repeatedly,”
a statement that reflects the protective ethos of the POCSO Act, which aims to minimize the psychological impact on child victims of sexual offenses.
The bench further highlighted that the petitioners had already been given two opportunities to cross-examine the victim, first on July 22, 2023, and again on August 14, 2023. Despite this, the defense counsel’s subsequent request for an adjournment was denied, leading the petitioners to seek the recall of the victim through a Section 311 application. Both the Special Court and the High Court had consistently rejected this application.
In delivering the judgment, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia referenced the principles established in the case of State (NCT of Delhi) v. Shiv Kumar Yadav (2016) 2 SCC 402. The court stressed that the discretion to recall a witness must be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily. Furthermore, such applications should not be granted routinely but only when they are bona fide and necessary, considering the individual facts and circumstances of the case.
ALSO READ: Kerala HC Judge Critiques POCSO Court Conditions
Legislative Intent and Protection of Child Victims
Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, while delivering the judgment, underscored the legislative intent behind Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act.
He stated:
“A plain reading of Section 33(5) of the Act reveals that the Special Court has a duty to ensure that a child is not repeatedly summoned to provide testimony. The legislative intent behind this provision is clear: to protect a child who has endured the trauma of sexual assault from having to recount the incident multiple times.”
The Supreme Court concluded that allowing the petitioners’ application to recall the victim would not only undermine the legislative intent of the POCSO Act but also potentially subject the child to further trauma. This decision aligns with the broader objective of the POCSO Act, which is to provide a safe and supportive environment for child victims during legal proceedings.
The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Anukul Chandra Pradhan, along with Advocates Shakti Kanta Pattanaik, Aradhana Parmar, Rajni Bala Sharma, Dr. Monika Mishra, and Sparsh Kanta Nayak. The case was heard under the Supreme Court’s Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction, with the final judgment being delivered on August 5, 2024.
