‘No sentencing in POSCO case, victim did not see it as crime’: Supreme Court delivers ruling using Article 142

The Supreme Court has decided not to impose a sentence on a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, citing exceptional circumstances in the case, according to a report by NDTV.

The ruling was delivered by a bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, invoking the Court’s special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure complete justice, according to the report.

Also Read: 'Judges not expected to preach': Supreme Court on Calcutta HC order asking adolescent girls to 'control sexual urges'

“The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her,” the Supreme Court remarked, according to the report.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court noted that the victim, who is now an adult, did not consider the incident to be a criminal act.

“Though the incident is seen as a crime in law, the victim did not accept it as one. It was not the legal crime that caused trauma to her, but rather the consequences that followed. What she had to face as a consequence was the police, the legal system, and a constant battle to save the accused from punishment,” the Court added.

Also Read: Calcutta High Court urges adolescent girls to control sexual urges, adolescent boys to respect women

“The facts of this case are an eye-opener for everyone.”

The case reached the Supreme Court following widespread backlash over controversial remarks made by the Calcutta High Court in its 2023 judgment acquitting the accused.

The High Court had overturned a 20-year sentence and made sweeping generalisations about adolescent girls, suggesting they should “control sexual urges” and that society views them as the “loser” in such situations.

Also Read: Supreme Court restores conviction in minor's rape, overturns Calcutta HC's order acquitting man

These comments sparked significant public outrage. The Supreme Court intervened not only to reassess the acquittal but also to address and scrutinise the High Court’s problematic observations.

(With NDTV inputs)