-
Bhupen Kalita v. State of Assam
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…
Pincites Para 63, 66, 123; Page 24, 28, 29, 52 Read case : Bhupen Kalita v. State of Assam -
Smruti Tukaram Badade V. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
The Court recognised the need and importance of setting up facilities that create a safe environment for recording the evidence of vulnerable witnesses. It provided directions for the setting up of centres for vulnerable witnesses (including minors). It was clarified that the definition of “vulnerable witness” contained in Clause 3(a) of the ‘Guidelines for Recording…
Pincites Para 5; Pages 2, 3 Read case : Smruti Tukaram Badade V. State of Maharashtra & Anr. -
Ranjit Rajbanshi v. The State of West Bengal and Ors.
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.
Pincites Para 43, 50, 52, 53; Page 5, 6, 7 Read case : Ranjit Rajbanshi v. The State of West Bengal and Ors. -
Eera Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors.
The Court held that the sanguine purpose is to safeguard the interest and well-being of the children at every stage of the judicial proceeding. It should provide for a child-friendly procedure and the atmosphere as commanded by the provisions of the POSCO Act has to be congenial. The protection of the dignity of the child…
Pincites Para 23; Page 23 Read case : Eera Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. -
Lalmalsom Kaipeng v. The State of Tripura
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…
Pincites Para 27-33; Page 5, 6 & 7 Read case : Lalmalsom Kaipeng v. The State of Tripura -
In Re Children in Street Situation
The Court recognized the difficulties of survivors of trafficking with respect to travelling long distances for the purpose of giving evidence in trial courts, especially during the COVID-19 Pandemic and adopted a Standard Operating Procedure (‘SOP’) for the effective recording of the child’s testimony through video conference. The SOP suggested that testimony of children, who…
Pincites Para 4 and 9; Page 4, 5 and 7 Read case : In Re Children in Street Situation -
Justin v. Union of India and Ors.
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.
Pincites Para 21-31, 35; Page 15-18 Read case : Justin v. Union of India and Ors. -
Sakshi v Union of India
The Supreme Court issued directions for vulnerable witnesses in cases of sexual assault. The guidelines state that in holding a trial in the case of child sex abuse or rape: (i) a screen or some such arrangements may be made where the victim or witnesses do not see the body or face of the accused;…
Pincites Para 34; Page 28 Read case : Sakshi v Union of India -
State of Maharashtra v Bandu @ Daulat
The court reiterated the guidelines laid down in Sakshi v Union of India and mandated their implementation by January 2018. It emphasized the necessity of creating a conducive environment for vulnerable witnesses to provide their statements with special guidelines for child survivors of sexual abuse. It directed that special centres for the examination of vulnerable…
Pincites Para 11, 12; Page 3, 4 Read case : State of Maharashtra v Bandu @ Daulat -
Court on its Own Motion v. State
The court held that a statement under the POCSO Act can be made only to a police officer or magistrate. Counsellors and NGOs can merely play a facilitative role and cannot take a statement from the child. Further, the court clarified that the notes of the counsellor or the expert are confidential and cannot be…
Pincites Para 6-8, 10, 12, 14-17, 19-21, 77-78, 87-89, 93-94 Read case : Court on its Own Motion v. State
All cases
Every case in the repository, across all categories.