Madras High Court Invokes Article 21 to Hear Convict’s Late Appeal in POCSO Case
In a significant ruling that underscores the primacy of constitutional rights, the Madras High Court has condoned a delay of over 1,000 days in filing an appeal by a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court invoked Article 21 of the Constitution, emphasizing that the right to appeal is a fundamental aspect of personal liberty.
Court’s Emphasis on Examining Delay Reasons
Justice N. Mala, presiding over the case, held that the special court was obligated to scrutinize the reasons behind the delay before dismissing the appeal solely on grounds of postponement. The judgment referenced a Supreme Court precedent, reinforcing that liberty is a fundamental right that cannot be lightly disregarded.
This court is inclined to condone the delay of 1,108 days, giving an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the statutory appeal on merits, Justice Mala stated, highlighting the court’s commitment to ensuring justice is not denied due to procedural lapses.
Background of the Case
The petitioner was sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment by a special court in September 2022 under Section 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The charges involved sexual assault resulting in the pregnancy of a minor female child, classified as aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
The appeal was filed with a delay attributed to financial constraints and difficulties in securing legal counsel. The petitioner argued that the delay was not willful or wanton, a point the court accepted, noting that such circumstances should not bar access to justice.
Key Findings of the Court
- The right to appeal is enshrined as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which protects life and personal liberty.
- Courts must examine the reasons for delay before dismissing cases on procedural grounds, ensuring that justice is not compromised.
- Financial hardships and inability to find counsel are valid reasons for condoning delay, as they reflect systemic challenges rather than intentional neglect.
- The petitioner is granted an opportunity to contest the appeal on its merits, with the delay formally condoned.
Details of the Offense
The case originated from an incident on November 4, 2018, where the convict, known to the survivor and her family, allegedly sexually assaulted a minor who frequently visited his house to watch television. This led to the survivor giving birth to a child on September 23, 2019. In addition to POCSO charges, the man was booked under Section 506 of the IPC for criminal intimidation.
On September 21, 2022, he was convicted and sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 10,000. The recent High Court ruling now allows his appeal to proceed, focusing on the substantive legal issues rather than procedural delays.
Implications for Justice Delivery
This decision reinforces the judiciary’s role in safeguarding constitutional rights, particularly in sensitive cases involving vulnerable groups like children. By condoning the delay, the Madras High Court sets a precedent that courts should be empathetic to litigants’ circumstances, especially when financial or logistical barriers impede access to justice.
The ruling aligns with broader judicial trends emphasizing that technicalities should not override substantive justice, ensuring that every individual has a fair chance to present their case.
