The Punjab and Haryana High Court has raised serious concerns over the decision of a Special POCSO Court to give up the victim as a prosecution witness in a rape case involving a minor. The High Court found this action unusual and asked the trial court to explain the reasoning behind such a move.
The matter was heard by Justice Amarjot Bhatti, who termed it “strange” that the victim’s statement was not recorded, especially since it plays a vital role in the fair adjudication of the trial.
“Recording of statement of victim is material for proper and final adjudication of the trial,”
— Justice Amarjot Bhatti
The Court was hearing the bail plea of the petitioner, Vijay, who was accused of raping a 16-year-old girl in 2020. The counsel for the accused argued that the case is fabricated and that the accused has already spent more than 4 years and 8 months in judicial custody without significant progress in the trial.
The petitioner’s counsel further brought to the Court's attention a zimni order dated 24 July 2024, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, POCSO, Karnal. This order showed that the victim had been given up as a prosecution witness. The copy of the Public Prosecutor’s statement was also submitted in support of this argument.
Taking note of this, the High Court expressed concern over the prosecution’s decision and sought an official explanation.
“It is strange that the victim as prosecution witness has been given up by the Public Prosecutor and this fact is incorporated in the zimni order dated 24.07.2024,”
— Justice Amarjot Bhatti
Accordingly, the Court directed the concerned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Karnal, to submit a report detailing the facts and circumstances under which the victim’s statement was given up by the prosecution.
It is also notable that in an earlier hearing held in January 2025, the High Court had acknowledged that the victim was below 16 years of age at the time of the alleged incident. The Court had remarked that such a serious matter required speedy trial and had instructed the trial court to make every effort to conclude the prosecution evidence promptly.
The case has now been listed for further consideration on 27 May 2025.
This judicial observation underscores the importance of the victim’s testimony in cases under the POCSO Act, especially when the accused has already endured extended incarceration. The High Court’s intervention signals a commitment to fair trial procedures and accountability in the criminal justice process.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.
Title: VIJAY V/S STATE OF HARYANA
