Special Procedures For Child Victims
β Legal Framework:
India provides special safeguards for child victims during investigation, trial, and post-trial stages, especially in cases involving sexual offenses, trafficking, abuse, and child labour.
Key legislation includes:
π 1. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
Enacted specifically to protect children (under 18) from:
Sexual abuse
Sexual harassment
Pornographic exploitation
Ensures child-friendly judicial process.
Important Provisions:
| Section | Provision |
|---|---|
| Section 24 | Child to be interviewed at residence or a place of choice |
| Section 25 | Statement of child not to be aggressive or intimidating |
| Section 33 | Child not to be called repeatedly to court |
| Section 36 | Child to be protected from exposure to accused |
| Section 37 | In-camera trials are mandatory |
| Section 19 | Mandatory reporting of child sexual offenses |
| Section 27 | Medical examination of the child must be conducted with consent and in presence of a trusted person |
π 2. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
Deals with children in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection.
Emphasizes rehabilitation over punishment.
Child victims are treated with utmost sensitivity and privacy.
π 3. Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 118 β A child is a competent witness if able to understand and answer relevant questions.
Section 114A (in rape cases) β Presumption of absence of consent when victim is under 16.
Section 119 β Allows witnesses who cannot speak to give evidence through gestures/writing.
π 4. Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973
Section 273 β Court can prevent direct confrontation between child and accused.
Section 164 β Statements of child victims to be recorded with sensitivity by magistrates.
π©ββοΈ Judicial Guidelines and Mandates
1. Sakshi v. Union of India (2004)
Facts:
Petitioner (NGO) demanded special procedures for rape victims, especially children.
Held:
Supreme Court directed:
In-camera proceedings for child sexual abuse cases.
No direct cross-examination by the accused.
Use of screens or separate rooms to record evidence.
Childβs statement should be recorded with sensitivity.
Importance:
Pioneering judgment ensuring child-friendly procedures in sexual offense trials.
2. Sheela Barse v. Union of India (1986)
Facts:
Child victims in custody were being mistreated and their cases delayed.
Held:
SC directed:
Creation of separate juvenile courts.
Appointment of child welfare officers.
Priority to speedy trial and proper care of child victims.
Importance:
Laid foundation for institutional safeguards for child victims and children in conflict with law.
3. State of Maharashtra v. Bandu (2018)
Facts:
A minor was raped; trial took place in a hostile environment, causing distress to the victim.
Held:
SC criticized the trial court for not using child-sensitive procedures under POCSO. Reiterated use of in-camera trials, non-threatening examination, and counselling support.
Importance:
Reaffirmed mandatory application of child-protection provisions in court.
4. Virender v. State of NCT of Delhi (2009)
Facts:
Sexual offense case involving a 10-year-old girl.
Held:
Delhi High Court issued detailed child-friendly guidelines:
Statements to be recorded at home or neutral places.
Presence of psychologists or support persons during interrogation.
Use of video conferencing where necessary.
Importance:
Served as a model for practical child-sensitive procedures adopted later in POCSO.
5. Tukaram S. Dighole v. State of Maharashtra (2010)
Facts:
Involved a child sexual abuse victim who was cross-examined aggressively.
Held:
SC condemned the hostile cross-examination and ruled that repeated, intrusive questioning violates the rights of child victims.
Importance:
Highlighted the need to train judicial officers in child-sensitive procedures.
6. Bijoy @ Guddu v. State of West Bengal (2017)
Facts:
Minor rape victim gave inconsistent statements due to trauma.
Held:
SC noted that inconsistencies in child victimβs testimony must be judged compassionately, and the trauma of the child should be a consideration.
Importance:
Recognized the psychological impact on child victims and promoted trauma-informed adjudication.
π‘οΈ Key Child-Friendly Procedures:
| Procedure | Details |
|---|---|
| In-camera trials | Mandatory for child sexual abuse cases (POCSO & CrPC) |
| Support persons | Child may be accompanied by trusted adult/counsellor |
| No direct confrontation | Accused must not confront child victim (screen/video) |
| Recording of statements | At childβs residence or child-friendly room |
| Prohibition of repeated testimony | Child should not be called to court multiple times |
| Medical examination | Conducted with consent, in presence of trusted person |
| Legal aid & counselling | Provided free under DLSA and POCSO Rules |
π― Conclusion
Child victims, especially in sexual abuse and trafficking cases, require heightened protection due to their vulnerability.
Indian laws and courts emphasize:
Protection from trauma
Confidentiality
Non-intimidating environment
Speedy and fair trials
Courts have consistently ruled that failure to follow child-sensitive procedures can amount to violation of child rights and lead to miscarriage of justice.
The approach is child-centric, trauma-informed, and anchored in the best interests of the child.
RELATED Blog
0 comments