POCSO Act Judgments Supreme Court of India
| 1 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SANJAY DUBEY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 939 Judge Name: KRISHNA MURARI,AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH directions/orders in bail pleas – FIR was filed against accused u/ss.376, 506, IPC; pocso act , SCST Act and IT Act –FSL Report was forwarded to the appellant- Inspectorwith a note that DNA examination as per guidelines be undertaken however, the DNA examination was not carried out – In the Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the “ pocso act ”), Sections 3(1)(W)(ii) and SANJAY DUBEY v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER A B C D E F G H 942 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 4 S.C.R. 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Date of decision : 11-05-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1466/2023 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 2 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs ASHARAM @ ASHUMAL – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 1 Judge Name: SANJIV KHANNA,M.M. SUNDRESH ), 376-D, 506, 509/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 23 and 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 20006, and Sections 5(f)/6, 5(g)/6, and 8 of the pocso act . He stands sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for different periods, and life Delhi, and her statement under Section 1 For short, ‘the High Court’. 2 D.B. Criminal Misc. Application No. 1 of 2021 in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 2018. 3 For short, ‘Cr.P.C.’. 4 For short ‘the Book’. 5 For short, ‘ pocso act ’. 6 For short, ‘JJ Act’. 7 For short, ‘N.G.O.’. A B C D E F Date of decision : 17-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1156/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 3 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer KARAN @ FATIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 587 Judge Name: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,VIKRAM NATH,SANJAY KAROL convicted for various offences under IPC and pocso act was awarded death sentence – Death sentence affirmed by High Court – During the pendency of the present appeals, appellant claimed juvenility – Trial Court was directed to submit report after due inquiry – Report submitted, appellant’s date of years – However, appellant has already undergone incarceration of more than 5 years – Incarceration beyond 3 years would be illegal – Appellant to be released from judicial custody – Impugned judgement passed by High Court modified – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 363, 376(2)(i), 302, 201 – pocso act – s.5 Date of decision : 03-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/572/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 4 | ANANT THANUR KARMUSE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 56 Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,C.T. RAVIKUMAR disposed of by the respective learned Courts. It is further submitted that in a case filed by a lady, accused No. 13 has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Court and the lady who registered the FIR against accused No. 13 is herself facing an FIR under IPC and pocso act . It is submitted Date of decision : 24-02-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/13/2023 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 5 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SHYAM KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. Vs SHUBHAM JAIN – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 873 Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,BELA M. TRIVEDI C D E F G H 877 District and Sessions Judge ( pocso act )-II, Raebareli,rejecting an application under Order IX Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’) for setting aside ex parte judgment and decree dated 09.03.2016/ 16.03.2016. 3. Shorn of unnecessary details and briefly put, the Date of decision : 02-02-2023 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/765/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 6 | THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Vs DR. MAROTI S/O KASHINATH PIMPALKAR – [2022] 8 S.C.R. 821 Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR said girl’s hostel – He was arraigned as the sixth accused thereunder, essentially for the failure to report the commission of the offence under the pocso act , punishable u/s.21 (1) the pocso act – Respondent filed Criminal Application u/s. 482 seeking quashment of the FIR and the chargesheet to the extent they are against him – High Court quashed the FIR as also the charge sheet qua the respondent – Hence, the instant appeal – Held: Prompt and proper reporting of the commission of offence under the pocso act is of utmost importance – Failure to report on coming to know about the Date of decision : 02-11-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1874/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 7 | MOHD. FIROZ Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 1027 Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,BELA M. TRIVEDI on quantum of sentence – In judgment dated 19.04.2022 for which review is sought, the petitioner-accused was held guilty and punished for the offences was under ss.376(2)(i), 376(2)(m) and under s.376(A) of IPC as also under s.5 (i) and s.5 (m) read with s.6 of the pocso act – In judgment dated)(i) and 376(2)(m) of IPC and for the offence under ss.5(i) and 5(m) read with s.6 of the pocso act is modified, so as to commensurate the said sentences with the sentence imposed for the offence under s.376(A) of IPC, and accordingly sentence is imposed directing the petitioner to undergo Date of decision : 21-10-2022 | Case Number : REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL)/282/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 8 | SUMITHA PRADEEP Vs ARUN KUMAR C.K & ANR. – [2022] 14 S.C.R. 1012 Judge Name: SURYA KANT,J.B. PARDIWALA ), 354A(2) and 354A(3) IPC /w ss.7, 8, 9 and 11 of pocso act – Allegation against respondent no.1 was that he sexually assaulted his 12 years old niece – He asked the victim to sit on his lap and thereafter hugged her and kissed her on the cheeks and tried to kiss her on her lips – He further that her academic pursuits were adversely impacted alone, coupled with the legislative intent especially reflected through s.29 of the pocso act , are sufficient to dissuade a Court from exercising its discretionary jurisdiction in granting pre-arrest bail – There appears to be a serious Date of decision : 21-10-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1834/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 9 | XYZ Vs ABHISHEIK & ANR – [2022] 14 S.C.R. 420 Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,HIMA KOHLI respondent was arrested along with other accused alleged to be involved in the commission of the offences. 1 “IPC” 2 “ pocso act ” XYZ v. ABHISHEIK & ANR. A B C D E F G H 424 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 14 S.C.R. 4. On 6 August 2015, the first respondent was produced before the Court of Date of decision : 02-09-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1408/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 10 | MANENDRA PRASAD TIWARI Vs AMIT KUMAR TIWARI & ANR. – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 174 Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.B. PARDIWALA Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) – ss. 5 and 6 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 397, 482 – Discharge of Accused – ‘X’, delivered a baby and thereafter committed suicide by hanging herself – FIR was registered for the offence punishable u/s 376 of IPC and the provision of the pocso act against, ‘ pocso act ”). FACTUAL MATRIX 2. The facts of this litigation are quite heart-breaking and at the same time, more disturbing is the utterly incomprehensible impugned judgment of the High Court discharging the accused of the offence of rape essentially on the ground of delay in the registration of Date of decision : 12-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1210/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 11 | VEERENDRA Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 225 Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR A B C D E F G H 225 VEERENDRA v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (Criminal Appeal Nos. 5 & 6 of 2018) MAY 13, 2022 [A. M. KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 376A, 376 (2)(i), 302 – pocso act – s. 6 – Rape and murder of a minor girl, was recovered – The post-mortem and the forensic science laboratory (FSL) reports revealed commission of rape in a diabolically and gruesome manner and causing of death by throttling – Trial Court convicted him for offence punishable u/s 302, 376A, 376(2)(i) of IPC and sec. 6 of pocso act and Date of decision : 13-05-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/5/2018 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 12 | ATBIR Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – [2022] 8 S.C.R. 1166 Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,ANIRUDDHA BOSE rape, under pocso act , convicted for multiple murders whether in single case or several cases, Dacoity with murder and murder after kidnapping for ransom, may be considered by the competent authority on the following parameters: – (i) Deputy Inspector General (Range) of prisons shall put Date of decision : 29-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/714/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 13 | MOHD. FIROZ Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2022] 19 S.C.R. 168 Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,BELA M. TRIVEDI was convicted for death sentence and life imprisonment, respectively, by the trial court for the offences u/ ss. 302, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m), 363, 366 IPC r/w. s. 5(i) r/w. s. 6 and s.5(m) r/w. s. 6 of the pocso act – High Court, while dismissing the appeal, affirmed the order of conviction by trial sections 302, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m), 363, 366 of IPC and section 5(i) read with section 6 and section 5(m) read with section 6 of the pocso act . The said order of conviction A B C D E F G H 173 was affirmed by the High Court; and is being further affirmed by this Court. [Para 36][197-F Date of decision : 19-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/612/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 14 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MS.Y Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. – [2022] 3 S.C.R. 27 Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,KRISHNA MURARI with FIR No. 319/2021 Registered at Police Station Udhyog Nagar, District Sikar for the offence(s) under Sections 354, 354B, 354D, 376(2)F, 376(2)N, 450, 506, 509 IPC and Sections 9N/10, 5L/6, 5(N)/6 and 18 of pocso act . 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has Date of decision : 19-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/649/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 15 | JEETU KHATIK Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2022] 3 S.C.R. 128 Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,ANIRUDDHA BOSE Court had convicted and sentenced appellant u/ss.363 and 354 IPC and s.8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences ( POCSO ) Act , 2012 – Prayer of appellant for suspension of execution of sentence declined by High Court –Appellant pleaded before Supreme Court that the High Court had – IPC – ss.363 and 354 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences ( POCSO ) Act , 2012 – s.8. A B C D E F G H 129 Preet Pal Singh v. State of U.P. & Anr., (2020) 8 SCC 645 – referred to. Case Law Reference (2020) 8 SCC 645 referred to Para 9 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Date of decision : 11-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/603/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 16 | GANGADHAR NARAYAN NAYAK @ GANGADHAR HIREGUTTI Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 925 Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,J.K. MAHESHWARI – Applicability of s.155(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure Code to the investigation of an offence u/s.23 of pocso act – Per Indira Baneerjee, J. – Procedure under Cr.P.C is not required to be followed as the offence u/s.23 of pocso act which has been committed, by disclosure of the identity of victim, necessitates expeditious investigation for compliance of sub-sections (5) and (6) of s.19 of POCSO – Per J.K Maheshwari, J. – Procedure of s.155(2) Cr.P.C is required to be followed in an offence of pocso act u/s.23 which is non-cognizable and special Court is required to look into the procedure Date of decision : 21-03-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/451/2022 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench |
| 17 | NAWABUDDIN Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – [2022] 1 S.C.R. 1083 Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,B.V. NAGARATHNA his finger into the vagina of the victim girl – Some persons spotted the accused and caught him red handed – Trial Court as well as the High Court convicted the accused for the offences under s.5 of the pocso act punishable under s.6 of the pocso act – On appeal, held: It was established and fall under s.3(b) of the pocso act and it can be said to be penetrative sexual assault – Considering s.5(m) of the pocso act as such penetrative sexual assault was committed on a girl child aged four years (below twelve years) the same can be said to be ‘aggravated penetrative sexual assault Date of decision : 08-02-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/144/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 18 | BHAGWANI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2022] 8 S.C.R. 1 Judge Name: L. NAGESWARA RAO,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,B.V. NAGARATHNA he shall not be granted remission. The conviction of the Appellant under Sections 363, 366A, 364, 346, 376D, 376A, 302, 201 of IPC and Section 5(g) (m) read with Section 6 of the pocso act is upheld. [Paras 17- 19][16-H; 17-A; 18-A-E] Dalbir Kaur v. State of Punjab (1976) 4 SCC 158 : [1977] 1, 366A, 364, 346, 376D, 376A, 302, 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) and Section 5(g)(m) read with Section 6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short “the pocso act ”) were upheld. 2. At 9.00 p.m. on 14.04.2017, Brijlal Yadav (PW-2) along with his wife Kalawati Date of decision : 18-01-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/101/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 19 | LOCHAN SHRIVAS Vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2021] 14 S.C.R. 809 Judge Name: L. NAGESWARA RAO,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,B.V. NAGARATHNA appellant, he did not offer any explanation except saying that it was wrong and false – Conviction u/ss.363, 366, 376(2)(i), 377, 201, 302 r/ws.376A and s.6 of the pocso act is maintained – However, taking into consideration the state of mind of appellant, his socio-economic background, etc., it of death sentence imperative. The judgment and order of conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(i), 377, 201, 302 read with Section 376A of the IPC and Section 6 of the pocso act is maintained. However, the death penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 302 Date of decision : 14-12-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/499/2018 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 20 | RISHIPAL SINGH SOLANKI Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. – [2021] 12 S.C.R. 502 Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,B.V. NAGARATHNA Judge pocso act (Exclusive Court), Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh,dismissing the Criminal Appeal No.27 of 2020. The said criminal appeal was filed against the order dated 11.11.2020 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Baghpatallowing the Miscellaneous Case No.16 of 2020 arising out Date of decision : 18-11-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1240/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 21 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA Vs SATISH AND ANOTHER – [2021] 10 S.C.R. 955 Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,BELA M. TRIVEDI , POCSO must be strictly constructed – However, clauses of a statute should be construed with reference to the context vis-a-vis the other provisions so as to make a consistent enactment of the whole Statute relating to the subject matter – Thus, considering the objects of the pocso act , its G H 958 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 10 S.C.R. As regards s.7 of the pocso act , the court did not find any ambiguity or obscurity so as to invoke the Rule of Lenity – Invocation of “Rule of lenity” was misconceived – Submission that the “Rule of Lenity” requires a court to resolve statutory Date of decision : 18-11-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1410/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off | Direction Issue : Appeals disposed of |
| 22 | MANOJ MISHRA @ CHHOTKAU Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2021] 8 S.C.R. 707 Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,A.S. BOPANNA and sentenced u/ss.363, 366, 376-D, 506 and s.4, pocso act – Held: Evidence of the prosecutrix and the medical evidence establish the charge of rape – However, charge of gang rape is not established with convincing evidence – Thus, conviction by the trial court, confirmed by High Court u/s.376-D is modified – Appellant is convicted u/s.376 and sentenced for the period undergone – Fine and default sentence imposed by the trial court, unaltered – Conviction u/s.506 is set aside – Although, conviction and sentence u/ss.363, 366, IPC and s .4, pocso act is confirmed – Protection of Date of decision : 08-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1167/2021 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 23 | APARNA BHAT & ORS. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. – [2021] 4 S.C.R. 479 Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,S. RAVINDRA BHAT , especially under the 4 (2018) 16 SCC 74 5 (2013) 15 SCC 570 6 (2015) 7 SCC 681 7 Crl. A. No. 438/2011decided on 27.11.2019 APARNA BHAT & ORS. v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. [S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.] A B C D E F G H 492 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 4 S.C.R. pocso act , granted bail on Date of decision : 18-03-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/329/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 24 | SHATRUGHNA BABAN MESHRAM Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2020] 13 S.C.R. 1 Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,INDU MALHOTRA,KRISHNA MURARI of death sentence – Thus, the Trial Court by its order awarded death sentence to the appellants on two counts, i.e. u/ s.302 of IPC and u/s.376-A of the IPC; rigorous imprisonment for life under two counts, i.e. s.376(1)(2)(f), (i) and (m) of IPC and u/ s.6 of pocso act – The High Court affirmed – Thus, the Trial Court by its order awarded death sentence to the appellants on two counts, i.e. u/ s.302 of IPC and u/s.376-A of the IPC; rigorous imprisonment for life under two counts, i.e. s.376(1)(2)(f), (i) and (m) of IPC and u/ s.6 of pocso act – The High Court affirmed the conviction and Date of decision : 02-11-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/763/2016 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 25 | STATE OF U.P. Vs GAYATRI PRASAD PRAJAPATI – [2020] 7 S.C.R. 959 Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,M.R. SHAH,R. SUBHASH REDDY /376/511/ 504/506 r/w s.3/4 of pocso act – His bail was rejected – He was admitted for treatment in hospital (K.G.M.U.) and remained admitted from 3.5.2019 to 17.1.2020 – On 9.3.2020, he was again admitted in K.G.M.U. – On 4.6.2020, he was shifted to super specialty hospital (S.G.P.G.I.M.S case necessary to decide this appeal are:- 3.1 The respondent, a former minister in the State of U.P. is an accused in case Crime No.29 of 2017 under Sections 376(D)/376/511/ 504/506 of I.P.C. read with Sections 3/4 of pocso act , Police Station Gautam Palli, District Lucknow. A B C D E Date of decision : 15-10-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/686/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 26 | GANESAN Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2020] 8 S.C.R. 768 Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,M.R. SHAH,R. SUBHASH REDDY and 8 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2012 – r.7(2) – Appellant- accused was tried for the offences punishable u/s. 7 r/w. s. 8 of the pocso act – Relying upon the deposition of PW-3 victim, aged 13 years the accused was convicted for the offence u/s. 7 of the pocso act and and evidence is of sterling quality – The trial Court has not committed any error in convicting the accused, relying upon the sole deposition of PW-3-victim – The High Court has rightly convicted the accused for offence u/s. 7 of the pocso act and rightly sentenced u/s.8 of the pocso act . Dismissing Date of decision : 14-10-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/680/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 27 | PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – [2020] 4 S.C.R. 1055 Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,ASHOK BHUSHAN,A.S. BOPANNA which His Excellency the President of India is said to have expressed concern about “attacks on women” and also said to have expressed his views that the persons who have been convicted of a crime under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences ( POCSO ) Act , should not be given the right to file Date of decision : 20-03-2020 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/122/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 28 | AHMAD ALI QURAISHI AND ANR. Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. – [2020] 1 S.C.R. 170 Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,M.R. SHAH maintain peace tranquillity. During enquiry, perused the complaint dated 03.08.2016 filed by the applicant before the Hon’ble Commission and found that the applicant filed complaint dated 29.08.2016 of the same charges u/ s 156(3) CrPC before the Hon’ble Court of Special Judge( pocso act )/Additional Session Judge, Court No.1, Jaunpur in which the Hon’ble Court of Special Judge, pocso act /Additional Session Judge, Court No.1, Jaunpur, as per its endorsement order dated 14.10.2016 has stated that in the entire facts and circumstances of the said case, sufficient grounds to register the Date of decision : 30-01-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/138/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 29 | ANOKHILAL Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1196 Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,INDU MALHOTRA,KRISHNA MURARI )(f) and 302 IPC r/w s. 6 of pocso act – Thereafter, conviction of appellant and imposition of death sentence and other sentences by courts below – On appeal, held: The day Amicus Curiae was named, on the same date, the counsel was called upon to defend the accused at the stage of framing of Date of decision : 18-12-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/63/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 30 | H MANOHARAN Vs STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARIETY HALL POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE (Review Petition (Crl.) Nos.446-447 of 2019) in – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1078 Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,SANJIV KHANNA,SURYA KANT for offence under Section 376 IPC. [Para 55] [1110-F-H] 7. Plea of erroneous reliance on POCSO It was urged that this Court ought not to have relied on a recent amendment to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences ( POCSO ) Act , 2012 to justify death penalty, as the new law was non-existent on the date of occurrence and hence cannot be applied retrospectively in derogation to Article 20 of the Constitution. Although the plea is attractive at first glance, it must be noted that the Petitioner has not been convicted or sentenced under the pocso act . Instead, only a passing Date of decision : 07-11-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1174/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 31 | MANI PUSHPAK JOSHI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR. – [2019] 13 S.C.R. 819 Judge Name: L. NAGESWARA RAO,HEMANT GUPTA ss. 5/6 of the pocso act – No prima facie case of any active part on the part of the appellant is made out in violating the small child – It is suggestive role of the family which influences the mind of the child to indirectly implicate the appellant – Fact that the prosecution after the offences punishable under Section 376(2) of the IPC read with Sections 5/6 of the pocso act . [Paras 9, 13-15] [827-F-G; 828-A-D] 1.2 The statement of the child so as to involve a person wearing spectacles as an accused does not inspire confidence disclosing more than prima facie to make him Date of decision : 17-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1517/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 32 | EBHA ARJUN JADEJA & ORS. Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT – [2019] 13 S.C.R. 741 Judge Name: DEEPAK GUPTA,ANIRUDDHA BOSE , 1985, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences ( POCSO ) Act , 2012 etc. where any delay in investigation is fatal. In these cases, the police officer is entitled to record the information some of which may indicate an offence under TADA Act, also because non-recording of the information with Police for sanction under Section 20- A(1) of TADA Act. The investigation in serious cases of murder, rape, smuggling, narcotics, pocso act etc. cannot be delayed only because TADA Act is also involved. [Para 15] [751-G-H; 752-A-C] 5. At the same time, where the information basically discloses an Date of decision : 16-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1692/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 33 | RAVISHANKAR @ BABA VISHWAKARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2019] 14 S.C.R. 285 Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,R. SUBHASH REDDY,SURYA KANT Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘ pocso act ’). Through judgment and order dated 19th July 2016, the Trial Court held the appellant guilty of kidnapping a 13 year-old girl, committing rape on her, killing her by throttling and thereafter destroying the evidence by throwing her half naked body in a Date of decision : 03-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1523/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 34 | RAVI S/O ASHOK GHUMARE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2019] 15 S.C.R. 712 Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,R. SUBHASH REDDY,SURYA KANT provisions of the pocso act alone, a penalty of death sentence can be imposed. In the case on hand, the offence was committed prior to coming into force, of the Act. Even then, the legislative intent which resulted in amendments to POCSO should not be forgotten, while dealing with the offences against the children. At the same time, even for imposing the death sentence, for RAVI S/O ASHOK GHUMARE v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA A B C D E F G H 724 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 15 S.C.R. cases arising out of the provisions under pocso act , 2012, it is the duty of the courts to Date of decision : 03-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1488/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 35 | English தமிழ் – Tamil Disclaimer MANOHARAN Vs STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARIETY HALL POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1007 Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,SANJIV KHANNA,SURYA KANT below 12 years of age) would fall within Section 5 (m) of the pocso act . There can be no doubt that this judgment is in keeping with the legislature’s realisation that such crimes are on the rise and must be dealt with severely. [Paras 23 and 24] [1053-C-D; 1054-D-F] 12. In the circumstances Date of decision : 01-08-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1174/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 36 | English हिन्दी – Hindi नेपाली – Nepali Disclaimer KUMAR GHIMIREY Vs THE STATE OF SIKKIM – [2019] 6 S.C.R. 203 Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,K.M. JOSEPH 31.01.2014 passed by the Special Judge( pocso act , 2012)convicting the appellant under Section 9/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012( pocso act , 2012), Section 341 of IPC. The appellant was to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- under Section 9/10 of pocso act , 2012 and under Section 341 of IPC he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. 3. The appellant aggrieved by the judgment of the Special Judge filed an appeal which though has been dismissed by the High Court but A B C D Date of decision : 22-04-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/719/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 37 | NIPUN SAXENA & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2018] 14 S.C.R. 755 Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,DEEPAK GUPTA this regard – Till that is done, the directions issued shall prevail – Constitution of India – Art.142 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.327(2). Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – ss.23, 24, 25, 33 and 37 – Children subjected to offences under the pocso act – Rights of – Held: No report in any media shall disclose identity of the child including name, address, photograph, family details, school, neighbourhood or any other particulars which may lead to the disclosure of the identity of the child – FIR relating to offences under pocso act not to be put in the Date of decision : 11-12-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/565/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 38 | LABHUJI AMRATJI THAKOR & ORS. Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. – [2018] 13 S.C.R. 822 Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN,AJAY RASTOGI First Information Report on 27.05.2015 under Sections 363 and 366 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “I.P.C.”) and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “ pocso act ”) that her daughter Parvati aged 14 years. After receiving the First Information Report, Police conducted investigation and submitted a Charge Sheet under Sections 363 and 366 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of pocso act against Natuji Bachuji Thakor, the accused. The statement of victim was also recorded by the Police, who, in her Date of decision : 13-11-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1349/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 39 | NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA THR. SECRETARY MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE – [2018] 7 S.C.R. 379 Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R.F. NARIMAN,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR,INDU MALHOTRA .377 – Examination of s.377 on the anvil of Art.14 of the Constitution – Held: The classification adopted under s.377 has no reasonable nexus with its object as other penal provisions such as s.375 and the pocso act already penalize non- consensual carnal intercourse – s.377, insofar as it have been criminalized by virtue of Section 377 IPC have already been designated as penal offences under Section 375 IPC and under the pocso act . Per contra, the presence of this Section in its present form has resulted in a distasteful and objectionable collateral effect whereby even Date of decision : 06-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/76/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 40 | DR. SR. TESSY JOSE AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 479 Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN when she was minor – As a result, she became pregnant and thereafter delivered a child in hospital – A case was registered against the appellants u/s. 201 r/w. s.34 and s.19(1) r/w. s.21(1) of pocso act – Appellant nos. 1 & 2 were medical practitioners and appellant no.3 was a Hospital appellants should have taken due care in finding as to how the victim became pregnant. Fastening the criminal liability on the basis of the aforesaid allegation is too far-fetched. The provisions of Section 19(1) of the pocso act , put a legal obligation on a person to inform the relevant authorities Date of decision : 01-08-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/961/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 41 | ALAKH ALOK SRIVASTAVA Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2018] 6 S.C.R. 972 Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR (POCSO) – Implementation of – Keeping in view the protection of the children and the statutory scheme conceived under the pocso act , directions issued so that the legislative intent and the purpose are actually fructified at the ground level – Held: (i) The High Courts to ensure that the cases registered under the pocso act are tried and disposed of by the Special Courts and the presiding officers of the said courts are sensitized in the matters of child protection and psychological response; (ii) The Special Courts be established, if not already done, and be assigned the responsibility to Date of decision : 01-05-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/76/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 42 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MADAN MOHAN Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. – [2017] 12 S.C.R. 222 Judge Name: R.K. AGRAWAL,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) read with Section 3/4 and 16/17 of pocso act , in Sessions a Trial No.44/2016. It is pending in the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur. The Sessions trial began pursuant to FIR No.110/2014 filed by the under Sections 363 · & IPC and Section 5/6 pocso act in the alternative Section 376(2)(g) IPC has been taken against the petitioners, Ashish Meena & Vimal Meena, and they have been called through non-bailable warrants. 3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners Date of decision : 14-12-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2178/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 43 | BARUN CHANDRA THAKUR Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND OTHERS – [2017] 12 S.C.R. 142 Judge Name: R.K. AGRAWAL,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE is working on the theory of possibilities and trying to analyse certain facts and evidence collected so far in the matter. The petitioner are admittedly resident of Mumbai. The question before the investigation agency is as to whether the provisions of Section 75 of the JI Act or 12 of POCSO Act are attracted against the petitioner; whether the child was in direct and ac.tual control of petitioners; or they have any other role in this case. Keeping in view the facts discussed above, I find it appropriate to give time to the investigation agency to analyse the evidence before it Date of decision : 11-12-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2152/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 44 | INDEPENDENT THOUGHT Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 821 Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,DEEPAK GUPTA – Children -Married girl child. Whether there is any incongmi(v between the Exception 2 to s.375 of the /PC ands. 5(n) of the pocso act and which provision overrides the other – Held: There is an apparent conflict or incongmi(v between the provisions of Penal Code and the pocso act – Whatever be regarding the pro-child slant of JJ Act as well as the pocso act – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(POCSO) – ss.5(n),42 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. 821 H 822 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 13 S.C.R Date of decision : 11-10-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/382/2013 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued |
| 45 | MS. EERA THROUGH DR. MANJULA KRIPPENDORF Vs STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. – [2017] 7 S.C.R. 924 Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R.F. NARIMAN awarded under the scheme prepared by the State Government in coordination with the Central Government – B In the instant rape case, since victim is certified to be mentally disabled person and is fighting the !is for sometime under the pocso act , State Legal Service Authority is directed to award pivotal issue that emanates for consideration in these appeals pertains to interpretation of Section 2(d) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ( pocso act ), and the primary argument for the appellant is that the definition in Section 2( d) that defines “child” to mean any Date of decision : 21-07-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1217/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 46 | RE: EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN lN ORPHANAGES lN THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs UNION OF lNDIA & ORS. – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 625 Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,DEEPAK GUPTA ) – Children in need of care and protection – Who is a C child in need of care and protection – The provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ( pocso act ) do not provide any definition of a child in need of care and protection – A child victim of sexual abuse or protection has to be given a broad interpretation – It must also include victims of sexual abuse or sexual assault or sexual harassment under the pocso act as also victims of child trafficking – Such children must also be given protection under the provisions F of the JJ Act being victims of crime under Date of decision : 05-05-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/102/2007 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued |
| 47 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF BIHAR Vs RAJBALLAV PRASAD@ RAJBALLAV Pp. YADAV@ RAJBALLABH YADAV – [2016] 9 S.C.R. 652 Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE was charged for committing offences under !PC, pocso act and the Immoral Traffic Act – During investigation, respondent had allegedly absconded and there were complaints against him of intimidating witnesses -Thereafter, respondent surrendered and filed bail application – Trial Court dismissed Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (” pocso act ” for short) as well as Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic Act, 1956. He is one of the co-accused in the said trial. FIR in this behalf was registered on the E basis of written complaint of the prosecutrix Preeti Kumari Date of decision : 24-11-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1141/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
Advocate in Jabalpur – Lawyer in Jabalpur – Ajay Gautam Advocate Jabalpur
This post first appeared on Jabalpur Advocate: Best Jabalpur Advocate Top Jabalpur Lawyer High Court DRT, please read the originial post: here
