Facts
An FIR was lodged against accused, alleging that he had committed rape on a disabled survivor who suffered from celebral palsy. On the basis of the FIR, an investigation was carried out and a charge sheet was filed for the offence under Section 376(2)(1) of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) before the Magistrate, who, in turn, committed the case to the special Fast Track Court. A petition was filed before the High Court praying that the matter should be transferred to the Special Court under the POCSO Act, as the functional age of the child survivor was hardly around 6 to 8 years due to her condition of cerebral palsy, and there was a necessity for the trial to be conducted in a congenial, friendly, and comfortable atmosphere. However, the application seeking to transfer the trial to the POCSO Special Court was rejected. Hence, an appeal was preferred by the survivor, through her mother.
Judgment
While the court held that under the POCSO, only the physical age of the child survivor is to be considered. The court gave certain directions on the manner in which testimony of child survivor under the POCSO is to be conducted. The court held that the provisions of the POCSO cast an obligation on the Special Court to see that the child, in no way, is exposed to the Accused at the time of recording of evidence. It was held that the recording of the statement of a child through video conferencing or by utilizing single visibility mirrors or curtains or any other device is permissible.