Introduction
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2015, is India’s landmark legislation for protecting and safeguarding children from sexual harassment and exploitation. The evolving framework of the Act has frequently been fronted with interpretive challenges, particularly with respect to its gender – neutral application. A latest landmark judgment by the Karnataka High Court has conclusively settled this debate, declaring that the POSCO Act applies equally to both female and male perpetrators and is a gender – neutral legislation, aimed at the prevention of sexual harassment against children. This high court judgment rejected a 52-year-old woman’s plea to quash an FIR registered against her under the POCSO Act provisions, corroborating the gender-neutral character of this crucial child protection, marking a significant development in contemporary jurisprudence.
Background
The facts that gave rise to this case are based on the allegations of sexual assault made against a 52-year-old woman who was accused of committing penetrative sexual assault on a 13-year-old boy, who was formerly the neighbour of the accused woman. The incident resulting in this case allegedly occurred in May 2020; however, the FIR was filed only in June 2024, creating a four-year rift between the alleged act and its formal reporting. The parents of the victim approached the High Court of Karnataka, seeking relief under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, which deals with the punishment for penetrative sexual assault and under Section 6 of the same Act, which deals with the punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
The accused women challenged this FIR under multiple grounds, including the 4-year delay in filing the complaint, the financial dispute between the accused and the complainant parents that allegedly instigated false accusations, and, more importantly, the accused had also put forth regarding the application of POCSO provisions to female perpetrators. The defence counsel argued that the charges were fabricated in order to avoid the financial obligation that the complainant parents have against the accused and that the delay in reporting such a serious allegation undermined the credibility of the allegations made against the accused.
This particular case gained prominence because of the involved interplay of gender dynamics in sexual assault cases and the interpretative lacunas surrounding the POCSO Act’s language usage, which has some gendered pronouns in its provisions. This case gave room for the Court to conclusively address the scope and application of the Act across the established gender lines.
Key Legal Principles
Many fundamental legal principles led the Karnataka High Court’s analysis in this case:
- Gender Neutrality in Child Protection: The Court has said that this particular legislation, intended to protect children, must be interpreted in a gender-neutral way, making sure that the primary focus of the Act remains on protecting the welfare of children regardless of the perpetrator’s gender. This principle takes note of the fact that sexual abuse can be perpetrated by a person of any gender and that child protection laws should be interpreted in such a way that is gender-neutral.
- Evolving Interpretation of Penal Statutes: The Court embraced a contemporary approach to statutory interpretation, looking into the statute beyond its literal textual meaning, and the court began to embody the broader purpose and intent of the legislation. The court stated that this interpretation ensures that protective laws should evolve with the modern realities of child abuse.
- Rejection of Gender Conceptions: The judgment by the Karnataka High Court very strongly rejected traditional gender conceptions that depict women as stoic participants and men as active perpetrators in any sexual offences. The Court made it clear that such antiquated thinking fails to acknowledge the complex realities of sexual abuse and also undermines the extensive protection that a child requires.
- Importance of ensuring Child Welfare: The Court stated that an important consideration in a POCSO case should be given to the welfare and protection of the child, looking over any other considerations such as gender-based presumption or traditional narratives about sexual abuse.
The Karnataka High Court Decision
- Judicial Declaration: Justice M. NagaPrasanna, while pronouncing the judgment, stated that the POCSO Act is “gender-neutral” and applies to both men and women equally. The court marked that the POCSO Act, is a progressive legislation, is intended for the protection of children from any kind of sexual harassment and must be entrenched in gender neutrality, with its objective being the protection of children, irrespective of gender.
- Interpretation of Statutory Provisions: The court did an analysis of sections 3,4,5, and 6 of the POCSO Act, stating that while some provisions of the Act use gender-based pronouns, the combined reading of the preamble and the purpose of the Act makes it clear that such usages are meant to include both male and female perpetrators. The court made it clear that the language used in the provisions clearly shows inclusivity, and the ingredients for an offence to be constituted under sections 4 and 6 of the Act are equally applicable to both males and females.
- Rejection of the arguments by the Defence: The Court has looked into and rejected the arguments put forth by the defence. With respect to the four-year gap in the registration of the incident, the court held that a delay in the registration of a crime cannot be an adequate reason for quashing a proceeding, specifically given the nature of the alleged offence and the age of the victim. The court also dismissed arguments about cognitive inability and the absence of potency testing, holding that these are unsustainable in the context of contemporary jurisprudence.
Recent Developments
This Karnataka High Court decision demonstrates an important development in India’s child protection jurisprudence, marking important precedents for future POCSO cases involving female perpetrators. This judgment aligns with similar progress-motivated rulings given by other High Courts, like the Delhi High Court’s 2018 decision that established a gender-neutral interpretation of the POCSO Act. By definitively settling the debate circling the gender-neutral application of the POCSO Act, the courts have created a precedent and uniform interpretative framework that ensures child protection regardless of the perpetrator’s gender.
The decision of the High Court also affirms the evolving nature of sexual abuse cases, taking into account that children can be subjected to various types of sexual abuse by perpetrators of any gender, not just male. Looking from the point of view of the children who are victims of sexual abuse, the court held that the children cannot be denied justice due to a pre-assumption of a particular gender in a sexual abuse case. This is one of the landmark decisions given by the High Courts of the country, aiming at the creation of a more equitable and effective child protection legislation.
Moreover, the court also held that the delay in the filing of the complaint can be justified due to many factors which prevent immediate reporting, especially in a case involving sexual abuse against a child and late reporting, thus, is not a valid reason to quash the proceedings in such a sensitive matter, making the decision pioneer one in criminal jurisprudence.
Conclusion
The Karnataka High Court’s ruling, which upholds the FIR registered against a woman under the provisions of the POCSO Act, marks a remarkable turn in the nation’s framework for ensuring the welfare and protection of children from sexual abuse. By affirming in unequivocal terms that the application of the POCSO Act is carved in a gender-neutral context, the judiciary ensures that minors, irrespective of a perpetrator’s gender, find the full extent of statutory protection. The judgment’s interpretive richness promulgates a strong legal framework for grappling with the multifaceted phenomena of child sexual abuse in the present era. It reasserts the doctrine that, in any adjudication under the POCSO Act, the primary intention of protecting the minor shall eclipse entrenched masculine or feminine presumptions concerning sexual wrongdoing.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY: YANA S JACOB
