‘She did not see it as crime’: Why Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to spare POCSO convict of sentence

The bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan heard the case.

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to sentence a man convicted under the POCSO Act, 2012, saying the legal process had caused more harm to the victim than the incident itself.

The bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan exercised Article 142 of the Constitution while hearing the case.

According to the bench, the victim did not perceive the incident as a crime and had suffered more trauma from the legal and social consequences after the man was convicted.

"The committee records that it was not the legal crime that caused any trauma to the victim but rather it was the consequence that followed which took a toll on her,” stated the bench as quoted by Livelaw.

The convicted man is now married to the victim, who is also now an adult. They live with their child.

The court also said the victim faced a constant battle with the police and the legal system to save the accused from punishment.

“The facts of this case are an eye-opener for everyone. It highlights the lacunae in the legal system," the bench said.

What is the case about?

In 2018, a 14-year-old girl from rural West Bengal was reported missing by her mother. It was later reported that she had married a 25-year-old man. The girl’s mother had alleged that the man kidnapped her. As a result, the man was convicted by a district court in 2022 and sentenced to 20 years in prison, according to News18.

The Supreme Court initiated a suo motu case following observations by the Calcutta High Court.

In 2023, the Calcutta HC acquitted the man convicted under the POCSO Act for sexual activity with a minor girl, remarking about adolescent sexuality and controlling female sexual urges. The apex court set aside the High Court’s ruling last year in August.

What is Article 142?

Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the top court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing "complete justice" in any case or matter pending before it. It was enacted by the Constituent Assembly on May 27, 1949.

According to Business Standard, an empirical study by IIM Ahmedabad in May 2024 has shown that the court has mentioned Article 142 of the phrase complete justice in 1579 cases between 1950 and 2023, most of them were civil cases. The study also found that the court has explicitly used its powers under Article 142 in 791 cases.

What did the top court do?

The top court issued broad directives for nationwide compliance with child protection laws, mandating that the judgment be circulated to all states and Union Territories for review and policy action.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development was asked to consider the suggestions made by the SC-appointed amicus curiae and report on further steps, according to Hindustan Times.