The Delhi High Court has clarified that Section 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act is aimed at preventing suppression of child sexual abuse cases, not punishing those who report offences late due to personal trauma or vulnerability.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while setting aside charges against a mother who delayed reporting the sexual assault of her child, remarked:
“If judges begin to treat delay and silence – born out of trauma or social oppression – as criminality, we risk turning the protective intent of law into an instrument of oppression itself.”
Section 21 of the POCSO Act deals with the failure to report or record a sexual offence against a minor. It provides for punishment, which may include imprisonment, a fine, or both, for those who fail to report such offences.
Read also: Delhi High Court: Baba Ramdev's 'Sharbat Jihad' Comment on Rooh Afza "Shocks Conscience"
In the case at hand, charges were framed against a mother whose daughter was allegedly assaulted by her father and two male relatives. While the mother had made earlier PCR calls to police, she had only reported physical violence by in-laws and not the sexual abuse of her daughter.
An FIR was eventually registered after the minor’s statement and legal steps were initiated solely due to the mother’s efforts, including getting a medical examination done.
“The law must recognise this hesitation not as guilt, but as a human response to a deeply complex situation,” said the Court.
The Court found that the woman was not shielding the accused, but rather a victim of domestic violence herself. The delay in reporting was not due to malice but due to her own vulnerable circumstances.
“Courage does not always come instantly. It sometimes takes time to build, and the fact that she eventually stood up must be honoured, not punished.”
Accordingly, the High Court ruled that framing charges under Section 21 in this case would harm both the mother and the minor, who depended on her for support.
“Framing charge for offence under Section 21 of POCSO Act against petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of the case, would cause grave prejudice to not just the petitioner... but also to the minor victim... Thus, the charge... is set aside,” the Court ordered.
This judgment emphasizes the need to understand human trauma and the complexity of reporting abuse, rather than taking a strictly technical or punitive view under the law.
Title: MOTHER X OF VICTIM A v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.