In a notable judgment, the Delhi High Court has quashed a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act case, directing the accused to pay a fine of ₹50,000 and undertake one month of community service at the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital. This decision underscores the judiciary's nuanced approach in balancing the rights of the accused with the interests of the complainant, especially in cases where both parties seek resolution.
The case stemmed from allegations against a man accused of harassing a minor school-going girl through exploitation. The charges included offences under Sections 354, 354C, 506, 509, 384, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. However, during the proceedings, the complainant and her mother expressed a desire to move on from the incident. They conveyed that the ongoing criminal case was hindering the complainant's future prospects, including matrimonial opportunities, due to the social stigma attached to such allegations.
The complainant's mother specifically highlighted the challenges posed by the pendency of the case, noting that it could undermine efforts to secure a suitable match for her daughter. In light of these concerns, a Settlement Deed was entered into between the parties, wherein the complainant voluntarily resolved all disputes with the accused and agreed to give no-objection to the quashing of the FIR. Importantly, she confirmed that she had neither received any monetary compensation from the accused nor intended to claim any.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, while initially hesitant to quash the FIR due to the serious nature of the allegations, ultimately decided to do so after a detailed and careful interaction with the complainant and her mother. The court acknowledged that, ordinarily, allegations involving the sexual harassment of a minor would not merit quashing. However, it emphasized the victim's right to privacy, dignity, and closure, noting that the complainant had unequivocally expressed her desire to move on from the chapter.
The court also recognized the deeply troubling pattern of coercion and intimidation directed at the minor, including threats to disseminate her private photographs in exchange for money. Such behaviour, if true, reflects a gross misuse of digital platforms and an alarming disregard for consent and personal dignity. Nevertheless, the complainant's expressed wish to move on, coupled with the social and emotional burden that the continued pendency of the criminal case placed upon her, influenced the court's decision.
In its order, the court directed the accused to pay ₹50,000 as costs, to be deposited towards the "Army Welfare Fund Battle Casualties." Additionally, the accused was mandated to perform one month of community service at the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital. These conditions were imposed to ensure that the accused contributes positively to society and acknowledges the gravity of the situation, even as the criminal proceedings were being quashed.
This judgment highlights the judiciary's capacity to adapt to the nuances of individual cases, recognizing that the standard application of legal provisions may not always serve the best interests of all parties involved. It underscores the importance of considering the victim's perspective and the broader social implications of prolonged legal proceedings.
In conclusion, the Delhi High Court's decision to quash the POCSO case, coupled with the imposition of a fine and community service, reflects a balanced approach to justice. It demonstrates the court's sensitivity to the complexities of human relationships and the need for legal outcomes that promote healing and societal well-being.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.