The convicted man is now married to the victim, who is also now an adult. They live with their child.
The Supreme Court on Friday ordered that a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act will not be charged, citing that the victim did not perceive the incident as crime, but had suffered more due to the legal and social consequences that followed the incident, as per Live Law.
The case was heard by the bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, exercising Article 142 of the Constitution, which means power to do complete justice.
"The final report concludes that though the incident is seen as crime in law the victim did not accept it as one. The committee records that it was not the legal crime that caused any trauma to the victim but rather it was the consequence that followed which took a toll on her. What she had to face as a consequence was the police, the legal system, and constant battle to save the accused from punishment", the Court said, as per Live Law.
The convicted man is now married to the victim, who is also now an adult. They live with their child.
"The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her," the Supreme Court said.
The Court stated that the case has extraordinary circumstances, involving the emotional attachment of the victim to the accused and the family that they have, called for the execution of powers under Article 142.
The suo motu case which the Supreme Court initiated came after the Calcutta High Court made a controversial ruling, acquitting a 25-year-old man convicted under the POCSO Act for sexual activity with a minor girl, remarking about adolescent sexuality and controlling female sexual urges. The apex court set aside the High Court바카라s ruling last year in August.
The Supreme Court then restored the accused바카라s conviction under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 376(3) and 376(2)(n) of the IPC. The Court also confirmed his acquittal under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The Court said that the High Court's remarks were objectionable, unwarranted and violated Article 21 of the Constitution.
Additionally, the Court had directed the West Bengal Government to form a three-member expert committee, incorporating a clinical psychologist, a social scientist, with assistance from institutions like NIMHANS or TISS, and a child welfare officer as coordinator and secretary, Live Law mentioned.
After the incident, the convicted man married the victim (now an adult) and is residing with her and their child. The Court observed, 바카라The facts of this case are an eye-opener for everyone. It highlights the lacunae in the legal system.바카라 It said the committee's report concluded that although the act was a legal offence, the victim did not consider it one.