Child sexual abuse victim can't be denied right to get justice as accused happened to be father: HC [Read Order]

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has said that a child victim of sexual abuse can't be denied his constitutional right to get justice just because the accused happened to be his father and had a matrimonial dispute with his mother.

The court rejected a man's plea to quash an FIR lodged against him for offences under the POCSO Act on a complaint by his son.

A single-judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma junked his contention that the FIR was based on false, fabricated and concocted facts due to estranged relationship between him and his wife, and that she had used the minor son to harass him to satisfy her false ego.

The court said the contention of the petitioner appeared to be premature for the purpose of quashing the FIR.

"This court remains conscious of the fact that such cases cannot be treated as cases of matrimonial discord but note that the child who is victim in this case has his own individual constitutional right to get justice in case he has been sexually abused," the bench said.

"To deny the child victim the right to get such justice only because one of the parties involved happens to be his real father and his father and mother have matrimonial discord will be highly unfair," the bench added.

The court also noted the victim has narrated specific incidents of sexual abuse, the manner in which those were committed, along with the places, time and dates.

It also pointed out that the child has already recorded his statement before the police as well as the judicial magistrate while a charge sheet has also been filed in the matter.

"This court while exercising its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot hold a trial, appreciate evidence or decide that the statements given by the child to the police, to the Magistrate, and to the counselor, he was taken to, were tutored, false or motivated," the bench said.

The bench further held that this court is not satisfied that the allegations in the FIR at this stage can be held to be false or vindictive.

"The truthfulness of the statement of the victim will become clear only during the trial of the case after the testimonies of the child and other witnesses are recorded and appreciated on the touchstone of cross-examination. Holding otherwise will amount to throttling the judicial proceedings and denying opportunity to get justice to the victim child," the bench said.

In the case, the bench decided to mask the name of the accused and mother, noting, Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act barred media from disclosing identity of the child victim in any manner.

"Section 23 of POCSO Act lays down the procedure for non-reporting of name of child in any media, this court is conscious of the fact that the judgements of the courts are reported in media and journals and such reporting of a case as the present one may lead to disclosure of identity of the child victim," the bench said.

Advocates Vaibhav Mahajan,
Harshita Aggarwal and Deepak Kakkar argued for the petitioner, while the Delhi government was represented by  Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP.

[Read Order]