Brief Facts
- The victim was a 14-year-old girl at the time of the incident. The victim’s mother filed a First Information Report (FIR) in May 2018, stating that her daughter had left home on, without informing anyone. It was alleged that the accused, about 25 years old at the time, had enticed the victim to leave her house with his two sisters’ help. The victim became pregnant as a consequence of the sexual assault. The victim gave birth to a female child, and the accused is admittedly the biological father of the child. There was a significant delay in the investigation, with the accused being arrested on 19th December 2021. The chargesheet was filed on 27th January 2022, charging the accused with offenses under the POCSO Act, IPC, and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. The prosecution examined seven witnesses during the trial. The victim claimed that she had married the accused and left her house of her own will. She expressed a desire to continue living with the accused. The victim’s mother produced the victim’s birth certificate as evidence of her age. The victim had been kept in Narendrapur Sanlaap home for some time before returning to her mother’s house, after which she went back to live in the house of the accused. Medical evidence confirmed that the accused had physical relations with the victim, resulting in the birth of a child. The accused was eventually released on bail after his arrest in December 2021.
- The Special Judge appointed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). Though the learned Special Judge under the POCSO Act came to the conclusion that the accused was guilty of the offences punishable under clause (n) of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of Section 376 of the IPC, in view of the sentence imposed for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, no separate punishment was imposed.
- Thereafter the accused preferred Criminal Appeal before the Calcutta High Court against the conviction. The High Court by the Impugned Judgement purported to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to set aside the conviction of the accused for the aforesaid offences.
- The Criminal Appeal was filed by the state of West Bengal, being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. Further in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C), the Court’s attention was drawn to certain objectionable observations made in the aforesaid judgement. While dealing with the same, the Court took note of the systemic failure of the State to protect the victim, resulting in her fate and wellbeing being ultimately tied up with that of the accused. The court also dealt with the issue of rehabilitation of the victim and her child. The Supreme Court vide its detailed judgment dated 20.08.2024 quash the judgment of the High Court and restored the conviction of the Appellant, however, the issue of quantum of punishment was kept pending awaiting the report of the committee of three experts constituted by the Supreme Court from the same judgment so as to assess the conditions of rehabilitation of the victim.
- Final report of the Committee recorded that it was not the legal crime which caused trauma on the victim, rather it was the legal battle which ensued consequent to the crime that is taking a toll on the victim. In the light of this, the final report recommended that it would be in the best interest of the victim and her child that the family unit stays intact, so that the accused father may be able to participate in the child’s upbringing. Further, the report also recommended providing financial, legal and educational support to the victim and her child.
Issues
- The court in this Case majorly dealt with 3 issues:
- Sentencing the accused
- Rehabilitation of the victim and her child
- Adopting measures for adolescent wellbeing and child protection
Held
- The Supreme Court issued a slew of directions after considering the gravity of the case where the family of the victim has abandoned her and the state has not be able to provide the necessary support and protection to the victim and her child. Considering the peculiar facts of the case the Court exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to order that though the accused stands convicted, he will not undergo sentence. In addition to this order the following directions were also issued to the state of West Bengal:
- To act as a true guardian of the victim and her child;
- To provide a better shelter to the victim and her family within a period of few months from today;
- To bear the entire expenditure of the education of the victim till Xth standard examination and if she desires to take up education for a degree course, till the completion of degree course. After she passes her Xth standard examination, theState can offer her vocational training, obviously, at the cost of the State;
- To bear the entire expenditure of the education of the child up to Xth standard and ensuring that she is educated in a very good school in the vicinity of the place of residence of the victim; and
- To endeavour to take the assistance of NGOs or public-spirited citizens for the purpose of securing the debts incurred by the victim as a one-time measure.
- The Court also directed the Ministry of Women and Child Development to appoint a Committee of experts to deal with the suggestions of the amici curiae to deal with the issues of protection and rehabilitation of the victim of such crime and the Committee was directed to submit its report to the Court for passing appropriate directions from time to time.
Other key observations of the Supreme Court
- The facts of this case are an eye opener for everyone. It highlights the lacuna in our legal system. The final report concludes that though the incident was seen as a crime in law, the victim did not accept it as one. The Committee records that it was not the legal crime that caused any trauma to the victim, but rather, it was the consequences that followed, which took a toll on her. What she had to face as a consequence was the police, the legal system and the constant battle to save the accused from punishment. At the same time, she took care of her daughter to the best of her abilities, notwithstanding the huge financial burden she carried. In fact, the final conclusion in the report is an eye opener.
- What troubles us is the issue of sentencing. The reports of the Committee stare at our faces. Though the victim did not treat the incident as a heinous crime, she suffered because of it. This was because at an earlier stage, the victim could not make an informed choice due to the shortcomings of our society, our legal system and her family. In fact, she did not get any opportunity to make informed choice. The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her. Now, she is at a stage where she is desperate to save her husband. Now, she is emotionally committed to the accused and has become very possessive of her small family.
- After having read the reports and having interacted with the Committee as well as the victim, we are of the view that if we send the accused to jail, the worst sufferer will be the victim herself. As compared to the situation in 2018, she is better placed today. Now she is comfortable with her small family. She along with theaccused, is concentrating on their daughter and they want to ensure that she gets quality education. At the same time, as recorded in the final report, the victim is attending school and is desperate to complete her school education. Though the State has offered to enroll her in some vocational course, she is keen on completing her education, at least up to graduation.
- In law, we have no option but to sentence the accused and send him to jail for undergoing the minimum punishment prescribed by the Statute. However, in this case, he society, the family of the victim and the legal system have done enough injustice to the victim. She has been subjected to enough trauma and agony. We do not want to add to the injustice done to the victim by sending her husband to jail. We as Judges, cannot shut our eyes to these harsh realities. Now, at this stage, in order to do real justice to the victim, the only option left before us is to ensure that the accused is not separated from the victim. The State and the society must ensure that the family is rehabilitated till the family settles down in all respects.
- Ultimately, this Court is bestowed with extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 for the sole object of ensuring that the highest Court of the land is in position to do substantial justice in its truest sense. In the context of this situation, sadly, true justice lies in not sentencing the accused to undergo imprisonment. This case is not going to be a precedent and should not be a precedent. This case is an illustration of the complete failure of our society and our legal system. All that the system can do for the victim now, is to help her fulfil her desire of completing her education, settling down in life, providing a better education to her daughter and ensuring overall better living conditions for her family.
- This year we have completed 75 years of the Constitution on 26th January. The Constitution contemplates the State to be a welfare state. The Constitution guaranteed social and economic justice to all the citizens. In this case, there is a failure to provide both social and economic justice to the victim. The facts of the case indicate failure of the concept of welfare state. To remedy the situation in this case, it is the obligation of the State Government to act as the true guardian of the victim and her child and ensure that they settle down in life and lead a happy, healthy and constructive life ahead.
Relevant Para No.
- 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28