The Supreme Court on Friday, under Article 142, decided not to impose any sentence on a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The development followed after SC discovered that the victim did not see the incident as a crime, and she had suffered more due to the legal and social consequences.
"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 observed, Live Law reported.
A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan exercising Article 142 of the Constitution, which empowers the court to do complete justice, had decided not to impose any sentence.
The court also observed that after the incident, the convicted man married the victim, who is now an adult, and is residing with her and their child. “The facts of this case are an eye-opener for everyone. It highlights the lacunae in the legal system," the court said.
After the conclusion of the committee's report, the court noted that although the act was a legal offence, the victim did not consider it one.
The Court further observed that the victim was previously unable to make an informed decision due to societal limitations, flaws in the legal framework, and a lack of support from her family. “The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her,” the Court said.
It also highlighted that the victim has since developed a strong emotional bond with the accused and is now “deeply protective of her small family.” Justice Oka explained, “This is the reason we are invoking our powers under Article 142 to refrain from imposing a sentence.”
Additionally, the Court directed the State Government to comply with certain instructions (details pending release of the judgment copy) and issued a notice to the Ministry of Women and Child Development to consider appropriate action based on recommendations submitted by the Amicus Curiae.
Background Of The Incident
The story of the incident dates back to 2018, when the woman was just 14 year-old was reported missing by her family. After several days, it was discovered that she had gotten married to a 25-year-old man. Reacting to it, the family of the girl registered a case, and the man was convicted under the POCSO Act by a local court, handing him a 20-year jail term.
Later, the Calcutta High Court acquitted the accused in 2023, but the case gained national attention due to its contentious comments on adolescent sexuality and moral expectations, according to a report by India To
The court had remarked that adolescent girls should "control their sexual urges" and suggested that society tends to view them as the "losers" in such situations. These observations sparked significant backlash and eventually led to the Supreme Court's intervention.
In August 2024, the Supreme Court overturned the Calcutta High Court’s acquittal and reinstated the man's conviction. However, it temporarily halted his sentencing and directed the West Bengal government to form an expert panel.
This panel, which included psychologists and child welfare experts, was assigned to assess the victim's emotional condition and overall well-being.
Earlier this year, the panel submitted its findings to the apex court, indicating that the victim had formed an emotional attachment to the accused and was "highly possessive" of her family.
Taking this into account, the Supreme Court exercised its powers under Article 142 to deliver “complete justice,” deciding that sentencing the man would disrupt the family unit and not serve the broader purpose of justice. "She did not have the opportunity to make an informed choice earlier. The system failed her at multiple levels," the court observed.
