The Punjab and Haryana High Court has delivered a significant ruling by denying bail to a man accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl, underscoring the judiciary's role as a protector of vulnerable children. In a detailed order, the court emphasized that a society's moral fabric is measured by how it treats its youngest members, directing the trial court to expedite proceedings and aim for conclusion within six months.
Court's Stern Observations on Child Protection
Justice Neerja K Kalson, while dismissing the bail plea, articulated that the judiciary bears a solemn duty to act as a guardian for those incapable of self-protection. The order stated, "When the innocence of a child is violated, the law must act not merely as a punitive instrument, but as an unwavering shield." This reflects a broader judicial philosophy prioritizing child welfare over procedural leniency.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a complaint filed by the survivor's mother, who reported her daughter missing and suspected the accused of enticing her away. An FIR was registered under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, along with relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), leading to the accused's arrest. A previous bail application had been dismissed by a Jhajjar court, setting the stage for this High Court appeal.
Legal Reasoning for Bail Denial
The court found a strong prima facie case against the petitioner, based on consistent and corroborative testimonies from the minor victim and her mother. Key legal points included:
- The POCSO Act's stringent framework prioritizes child welfare, making bail considerations more rigorous in such cases.
- While the right to a speedy trial is fundamental, the Supreme Court has ruled that incarceration duration alone cannot justify bail in grave offences like those under POCSO.
- Granting bail at this stage, with 18 witnesses yet to be examined, could risk witness tampering and intimidation.
- The absence of external injuries on the victim does not disprove allegations of penetrative sexual assault, as such crimes may not leave visible marks.
Broader Implications for Society
Referencing the adage that "The soul of a society is judged by how it treats its children, for they are the living messages we send to a time we will not see," the court remarked that a lenient approach is wholly unwarranted. This ruling reinforces the legal system's commitment to acting as a shield for minors, aligning with national efforts to combat child sexual abuse through fast-track trials and protective jurisprudence.
The court's directive to conclude the trial within six months highlights an urgency in addressing such cases, potentially setting a precedent for other courts to prioritize expedited proceedings in POCSO matters. This decision not only impacts the immediate case but also sends a clear message about the judiciary's stance on protecting children from sexual offences.
