The Delhi High Court has reaffirmed that courts have a crucial responsibility to support minor victims of sexual assault, even in cases where their own parents do not stand by them.
"The legal system recognizes the rights of every child, and even when their own parents fail to support them, the Court has a bounden duty to uphold their voice, protect their rights, and ensure justice is served in accordance with the law," observed Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
This observation was made in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, where a minor girl was allegedly sexually assaulted by her father. Additionally, an FIR was registered against the mother for failing to report the crime.
Case Background
The mother had previously filed a rape case against her husband, which was later settled. However, when fresh allegations arose, the father sought bail, claiming that the complaint was motivated by revenge and that the mother was using their daughter to settle marital disputes or extort money.
Justice Sharma dismissed the bail plea, rejecting the argument that the allegations were a tactic in the parents' ongoing conflicts.
Read also: Delhi High Court: IVth Schedule of Arbitration Act Not Mandatory for International Arbitrations
The High Court highlighted that a minor victim’s right to seek justice cannot be dismissed simply because their parents are involved in legal disputes.
"The prosecutrix, who is a minor, cannot be deprived of her right as an individual to seek justice merely because her parents are embroiled in litigation. The right of a victim of sexual assault to report cannot be viewed with suspicion solely because the allegations pertain to incest," the Court stated.
The Court further noted that each case must be evaluated based on its own facts, and any prior settlements between the parties do not grant immunity against serious new allegations.
Read also: Delhi High Court Orders Removal of Allegedly Defamatory Content About ANI on Wikipedia
Another crucial aspect highlighted by the Court was that a mother’s past compromise with the father, or her earlier no-objection to bail, does not automatically mean she is a habitual complainant.
"Victims of sexual assault, particularly minor children, have independent rights under the law, which cannot be negated merely because their parents have chosen to settle disputes among themselves," the Court emphasized.
Title: NA v. State
