The Delhi High Court recently maintained that for upholding the presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), would operate only when the prosecution proves the foundational facts in the context of allegations against the accused is beyond reasonable doubt.
The Section 29 of the POCSO Act, 2012 states that the court shall presume that the accused has committed the offence of sexual assault against a minor which he is charged with, until the contrary is proved.
Nonetheless, while deciding on a case, the Delhi High Court ruled that the presumption of guilt under Section 29 & 30 of POCSO Act taken by the learned Trial Court could not be an edifice to convict the appellant since testimony of victim is unreliable and there are serious flaws and gaps in the prosecution case. Allowing an appeal in a POCSO Act case where the accused was the 12-year-old victim’s relative, the High Court set aside the conviction and sentencing of the accused person.
The bench comprising Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta reasoned that the victim’s case is marred by inadequacies and contradictions which strike to the root of the prosecution case and, as such, prosecution has failed to bring home the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The court further observed that, as a wrongful acquittal shakes the confidence of people, a wrongful conviction is far worse. It added that a child abuser in the eventuality of false implication even continues to suffer a blot of social stigma which is much more painful than the rigours of a trial and imprisonment.
Hence, it acquitted the accused-appellant and directed that he be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. The High Court was hearing an appeal preferred by the appellant/convict under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) challenging the judgment and order on sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court POCSO, New Delhi.