In a rare move under Article 142, the Supreme Court set aside a man’s POCSO conviction, noting the relationship was driven by “love, not lust.” The court observed the couple is now married with a child and living a peaceful life.
The Supreme Court has given the Centre six weeks to respond to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) asking for chemical castration of rapists. The Court also allowed the petitioner to share the plea with women lawyers for their suggestions. This move is part of efforts to improve women’s safety and justice for sexual offences. The petitioner can consult experts to strengthen the case.
![[Atul Subhash Suicide] A New Plea Filed In SC Calls for Preliminary Inquiry in Dowry and Sexual Offence Cases, UCC Implementation](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Uniform-civil-code-2.jpg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
A Supreme Court petition has been filed seeking preliminary inquiries in cases of dowry harassment and sexual offences, while advocating for a Uniform Civil Code. The petition highlights concerns over the misuse of women’s rights, calls for legal consolidation to enhance efficiency, and requests virtual hearings for individuals outside court jurisdictions.
The Delhi High Court, under Justice Vikas Mahajan, ruled that video recording of all proceedings, including bail hearings, is mandatory under the SC/ST Act, without exceptions for sexual crimes. The court emphasized that these recordings must be used only for court purposes, ensuring the privacy and protection of victims’ identities.
Yesterday(on18th March),The Kerala High Court upheld a protocol mandating that only gynaecologists conduct examinations of sexual assault survivors, dismissing a petition filed by government hospital gynaecologists. The decision was made in response to a petition challenging the protocol’s requirement, which mandates only gynaecologists to conduct examinations on survivors of sexual offences. The petitioners argued that this requirement contradicts existing laws and international guidelines and called for a modification of the protocol to extend the responsibility of medical examinations to all registered medical practitioners. Despite their petition being dismissed, the court granted the petitioner-gynaecologists the liberty to approach the appropriate State authorities with their grievances.
