Bombay High Court overturns order that closed POCSO case against father for sexual assault of daughter

The Bombay High Court at Goa recently overturned a children's court decision that discharged a father accused of sexually assaulting his daughter [State of Goa thr. Women Police Station, Panaji v. M].The children's court had closed the solely on the ground that the victim was 16 years and 4 months old on the day of the alleged incident. Under the Goa Children’s Act, in rape cases, a child is any person who has not completed sixteen years of age.Single-judge Justice Bharat P Deshpande ruled that the children's court erred in its interpretation of the law by discharging the accused since the victim's statement revealed that the abuse began when she was in the seventh standard, likely making her under 16 years of age at the time. .The accused, the father of the victim, was charged for various offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), 2012 as well as of the Goa Children's Act, 2003 for sexually assaulting his daughter. Although she was abused since she was a minor, the offence was not reported until February 14, 2021. A chargesheet too was filed at Women Police Station, Panaji. However, the children’s court, despite the severity of charges, discharged the accused. Subsequently, the State moved the High Court against the same. During the hearing, the State argued that the children's court ignored evidence suggesting that the abuse started before the victim turned 16. The Court agreed that the lower court's decision failed to consider the victim's testimony and the legal definition of a child.“As per the birth certificate, the date of birth of the victim is 30.09.2004. It may be correct that on 14.02.2021 the victim was above 16 years of age. However, that is not the sole incident which the victim has disclosed in the statement. Such overt acts were performed by the accused even prior to 14.02.2021, which are found in the statement of the victim," the Court stated. .The victim had testified that the abuse began when she was in the seventh standard, which would have made her approximately 12 or 13 years old at the time. She described the ongoing abuse including incidents that occurred prior to the specific date mentioned in the complaint."Thus, the observations of the children's court in the impugned order are found to be perverse and incorrect," the Court noted.Hence, the Court set aside the order of discharge and remanded the matter back to the children’s court. The accused was directed to appear before the trial court on September 23. .Additional Public Prosecutor Pravin N Faldessai appeared for the State..[Read Order]