Author: Sahanadevi. S. Dongaragavi, B. V. Bellad Law College, Belagavi, Karnataka
To the point
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, amended in 2019, stands as a key pillar in India’s legal framework to protect children from sexual abuse and exploitation. Recent Supreme Court directions have prompted the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) to conduct nationwide and regional consultations aimed at identifying implementation challenges, strengthening victim support under Section 39, and ensuring the holistic rehabilitation of girl child survivors. These efforts reflect a collaborative approach among various stakeholders to promote gender justice and ensure that every child receives a sensitive, fair, and child-friendly legal process, while reinforcing the Act’s core principles such as the presumption of guilt under Sections 29 and 30 and its close alignment with the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Use of Legal Jargon
In the realm of juvenile jurisprudence, the POCSO Act delineates penetrative sexual assault (Section 3), aggravated forms thereof (Section 5), and non-penetrative sexual harassment (Section 11), imposing vicarious liability on abettors (Section 16) and mandating mandatory reporting under Section 19, with penal consequences for non-compliance per Section 21. Victim safeguards invoke the doctrine of parens patriae through Child Welfare Committees (CWCs) under Rule 4 of the POCSO Rules, 2012, facilitating in-camera proceedings (Section 33), verbatim evidence recording (Section 25), and presumptive admissibility of audio-video statements (Section 26). The 2019 Amendment escalates minima for aggravated offences to rigorous imprisonment for life or death (Section 6), while Section 39 operationalizes multidisciplinary support persons, empanelled pursuant to Supreme Court mandates in ongoing PILs, to mitigate secondary victimization, ensuring res ipsa loquitur in presuming mens rea (Section 30). Multi-stakeholder reforms, monitored via NCPCR’s POCSO e-Box and Tracking Portal, harmonize with Article 21’s right to life and dignity, obviating adversarial rigors in favor of inquisitorial equity for child deponents.
The Proof
Empirical validation of these reforms emanates from NCPCR’s operationalization of Supreme Court orders. In compliance with directives in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1156/2021 (We the Women of India v. Union of India) and Writ Petition No. 427/2022 (Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India), the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) issued nationwide guidelines on March 18, 2024, for support persons under Section 39, rendering their appointment non-discretionary absent recorded justification by the CWC. These guidelines prescribe empanelment via district-level selection committees, comprising Special POCSO Judges and District Magistrates, with a caseload cap of 10:1 to avert burnout and ensure continuity.
NCPCR’s User Handbook on POCSO Act, 2012, elucidates victim protection protocols: statements under Section 164 CrPC must precede forensic examinations sans the prohibited two-finger test, with girl victims examined solely by female gynecologists in the presence of a trusted adult or nominated woman (Section 27; Rule 5). Emergency medical prophylaxis, including post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV/STIs, is statutorily imperative within 24 hours, irrespective of FIR registration, with chain-of-custody preserved for SAFE kits.
Multi-stakeholder reforms are evidenced in NCPCR’s regional consultative meetings, such as the June 26, 2023, Western Region conclave on “POCSO: Factors Hindering Implementation and Aspects of Assistance to Victims,” which identified bottlenecks like delayed CWC assessments (mandated within 72 hours per Rule 4(4)) and suboptimal DCPU coordination under Section 43. The National Consultation on POCSO Act and Children in Armed Conflict (Protection and Rehabilitation) Act, documented in NCPCR’s photo gallery, convened stakeholders, including CWCs, SJPUs, NGOs, and SPPs, to devise pathways for gender-sensitive rehabilitation, emphasizing RTE Act, 2009, linkages for educational continuity post-trauma.
Compensation protocols under Rule 7(3) factor in offence gravity, relational betrayal (e.g., incestuous assaults under Section 5(n)), and ancillary harms like scholastic disruption, disbursed from state Victims Compensation Funds within 30 days. NCPCR’s POCSO Tracking Portal aggregates real-time data on 1:10 support person ratios, ensuring SCPCR oversight at state echelons.
Abstract
This article explores how the Supreme Court’s directions and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR)’s consultations have worked together to strengthen the POCSO Act’s framework for safeguarding girl children. The 2019 amendment expanded punishments and enhanced the rights and support available to victims, while Section 39 emphasizes providing psychological assistance to prevent further trauma during legal proceedings. Drawing from official reports and evidence, the article highlights the functioning of Special Juvenile Police Units (SJPUs) in investigations, the role of Child Welfare Committees (CWCs) in protection, and the requirement under Section 35 for trials to conclude within one year. It further underscores the importance of coordinated efforts among the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD), District Child Protection Units (DCPUs), and civil society organizations to uphold India’s commitments under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), ensuring that every child, especially girls, receives justice and compassionate protection in cases of abuse.
Case laws
1. We the Women of India v. Union of India (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1156/2021): The apex court, invoking Article 32, mandated uniform guidelines for Section 39 support persons, deeming their provision a facet of Article 21’s right to speedy justice. It interdicted parental vetoes sans CWC rationale, emphasizing familiarity with the child to forestall alienation. The verdict catalyzed NCPCR’s 2024 guidelines, prescribing induction training on psychological first aid and POCSO e-Box reporting, thereby rectifying implementation lacunae in rural jurisdictions
2. Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (Writ Petition No. 427/2022): Reiterating parens patriae, the Court directed mandatory CWC referrals within 24 hours (Section 19(6)), censuring delays in interim compensation (Rule 7(1)). It underscored gender-neutral yet girl-centric safeguards, prohibiting media disclosures under Section 23 and mandating woman officers for statements (Section 24(5)). This PIL spurred regional consultations, enhancing DCPU empanelments and portal integrations for threat assessments.
3. Independent Thought v. Union of India ((2017) 10 SCC 800): Though pre-amendment, this precedent invalidated marital exceptions for minors under Section 375 IPC vis-à-vis POCSO, affirming no spousal immunity for aggravated assaults (Section 5). It fortified victim autonomy, influencing 2019 enhancements to death penalties for sub-ten-year victims, and informed NCPCR handbooks on incest protocols.
Conclusion
The combined impact of Supreme Court directions, NCPCR-led consultations, and ongoing reforms under the POCSO Act marks a significant step towards a more restorative and victim-focused approach to justice for the girl child. By introducing support persons, ensuring faster and more child-friendly trials, and encouraging collaboration among multiple stakeholders, India is reinforcing its commitment to Article 39(f) of the Constitution, protecting the dignity of children and shielding them from exploitation. However, there are still hurdles to overcome, such as understaffed Child Welfare Committees (CWCs) and uneven access to District Child Protection Units (DCPUs), which call for greater funding and the use of technology for better monitoring. Ultimately, these efforts aim to go beyond punishment alone, envisioning a society where gender justice is not only delivered in courtrooms but actively promoted through widespread awareness, sensitivity, and equal opportunities.
FAQs
Q1: What is the role of a Support Person under Section 39 of POCSO Act?
A: Appointed by the CWC, they provide emotional, psychological, and logistical aid to victims during investigation, trial, and rehabilitation, including accompanying for medical exams and ensuring educational continuity, with mandatory empanelment and training per 2024 guidelines.
Q2: How does the 2019 Amendment strengthen victim protections?
A: It introduces death penalty for aggravated assaults on children under 12 (Section 6), mandates faster trials via Fast Track Special Courts, and enhances compensation schemes under Rule 7, prioritizing interim relief for immediate rehabilitation needs.
Q3: What are the mandatory reporting obligations under POCSO?
A: Any person with knowledge of an offence must report to SJPU or police within 24 hours (Section 19), non-reporting invites up to six months’ imprisonment (Section 21), except for the child victim.
Q4: How do national consultations contribute to POCSO implementation?
A: NCPCR’s consultations, like the 2023 Western Region meeting, identify hurdles such as delayed CWC assessments and victim assistance gaps, recommending stakeholder training and portal-based tracking for uniform enforcement.
