Sympathy for accused against aim of POCSO Act: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, March 4

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asserted that misplaced sympathy towards accused in matters relating to offences against children was likely to defeat the statutory object and purpose of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The assertion by Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj came in a case where three children in conflict with law were convicted and sentenced to two years of imprisonment for commission of offences under Section 377 of the IPC (unnatural offence) and Section 10 of the POCSO Act.

Appearing before Justice Bhardwaj’s Bench, their counsel sought a lenient view in case of the petitioners after the Bench upheld the order of conviction passed by the courts below. Justice Bhardwaj ruled that the order was valid, legal, in accordance with law and did not suffer from any illegality, infirmity or perversity.

In his detailed order, Justice Bhardwaj referred to the objects and reasons of the POCSO Act, and Supreme Court judgments on the issue. Justice Bhardwaj also quoted one of the judgments as saying, among other things, that any act of sexual assault or sexual harassment to the children was required be viewed “very seriously”.

All such offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment on the children were required to be dealt with in a stringent manner and leniency should not be shown to a person, who has committed an offence under the POCSO Act.

The judgment added: “By awarding a suitable punishment commensurate with the act of sexual assault, sexual harassment, a message must be conveyed to the society at large that, if anybody commits any offence of sexual assault, sexual harassment or use of children for pornographic purposes, they shall be punished suitably and no leniency shall be shown to them.”

Justice Bhardwaj observed that a perusal of the object of the statute reinforced the need for the courts to adopt a stance in the matters relating to offences against children. “A misplaced sympathy is likely to defeat the statutory object and purpose. Considering that the victim happens to be a child of only eight years as on the date of occurrence, his dignity having been violated by sheer brute force, I am not inclined to accept the said submission as well and reject the same.”