On Tuesday, the Supreme Court overturned a controversial judgment by the Calcutta HC that had acquitted a man convicted of sexually assaulting a minor girl, citing his subsequent marriage to the victim.
The High Court’s ruling had also included ‘objectionable’ advice suggesting that adolescent girls should ‘control sexual urges’.
The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, reinstated the conviction under Section 376 (Rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and issued new guidelines for how judges should handle cases involving adolescents.
The bench set aside the judgment and restored the conviction under Section 376 (Rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). They directed the court on how to write the judgment and confirmed that it would remove all previous observations.
SC Criticizes HC’s Advice & Handling Of Juvenile Cases
The Court criticized the High Court’s failure to refer the case to the Juvenile Justice Board, emphasizing that the Juvenile Justice Act has adequate provisions to address such cases until the child reaches 21 years of age.
The Supreme Court also mandated the implementation of provisions from Sections 19(6) of the POCSO Act and Sections 30 to 43 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
Additionally, a committee of experts will form to assist the victim in making informed decisions.
The Supreme Court had previously raised concerns about the High Court’s decision on 4 January 2024, criticizing its problematic remarks.
These included advice to adolescent girls on managing sexual urges and to young men on respecting women, which were deemed inappropriate.
The High Court’s 18 October 2023, verdict had acquitted a man previously convicted by a lower court for raping a minor with whom he had a romantic affair.
The High Court had controversially suggested that both boys and girls should control their sexual impulses.
Following this ruling, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the case and criticized the High Court’s remarks as sad and unfortunate.
The Court emphasized that judges should avoid personal opinions and preachings in their judgments.
The West Bengal government had also challenged the October 18 verdict in the Supreme Court, which had earlier appointed senior lawyer Madhavi Divan as Amicus Curiae to assist in the matter.
Also Read: West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose To Meet Amit Shah Over RG Kar Hospital Tragedy
