Case Repository

There is a need to create a conducive environment to encourage vulnerable witnesses to make their statements. Screens or a similar arrangement must be made to ensure that they don’t see the face or body of the accused. Questions for cross examination must be given in writing to the presiding officer of the Court who…

Para 10; Page 2

Guidelines laid down specifically for recording of evidence of in cases of child sexual abuse:(i) a screen or some such arrangements may be made where the victim or witnesses (who may be equally vulnerable like the victim) do not see the body or face of the accused; (ii) the questions put in cross-examination on behalf…

Para 1, 34; Page 1, 18.1

Provisions of the POCSO reiterated by the court: The child may have a parent or other trusted person present at the time of testifying and can call for assistance from an interpreter, special educator, or other professional while giving evidence; further, the child is not to be called repeatedly to testify in Court and may…

Para 2, 15, 17, 19, 22; Page 1, 3, 4

While sexual intent under S. 8 POCSO is a question of fact, the Court is entitled to raise the presumption under S. 30 POCSO with regard to the culpable state of mind of the accused when the court is satisfied with the existence of a fact beyond reasonable doubt.

Para 36-37, 42; Page 15, 17

Where foundational facts have been established, the presumption under section 29 POCSO becomes operational and the accused is bound to rebut the presumption.

Para 32; Page 39 & 40.

The presumption clause of Section 29 POCSO is applicable to both the offender and the abettor of the offence. When foundational facts have been established, the accused must discharge the reverse burden cast by Sections 29 and 30 POCSO.

Para 16-17; Page 8

For the applicability of Section 29, the prosecution is required to establish foundational facts on the standard of preponderance of probability and not beyond reasonable doubt. Once prosecution has been able to establish foundational facts based on preponderance of probability then by legal presumption under Section 29 of Act it could be said that prosecution…

Para 63, 66, 123; Page 24, 28, 29, 52

When the prosecution fails to establish a strong preponderance of probability sufficient to raise a presumption under Section 29 POCSO, the negative burden to prove their innocence will not shift to the accused if the defence effectively discredits the prosecution's case, the accused will be discharged of their onus under Section 29 POCSO.

Para 43, 50, 52, 53; Page 5, 6, 7

The duty to rebut the presumption under Section 29 POCSO arising only after the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the foundational facts.The burden to rebut the presumption can be discharged by the accused through effective cross-examination, or by adducing defence evidence or by the accused himself tendering oral evidence. The presumption and the duty to…

Para 27-33; Page 5, 6 & 7

Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act are held to be Constitutional and they do not violate the Fundamental Rights, nor are they contrary to the basic criminal Principles. Presumption under Sections 29 and 30 POCSO would become operational only after the prosecution has established the foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt.

Para 21-31, 35; Page 15-18