June 14, 2025 10:08 am

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Section 39 – Protection to victims – Appointment of support persons – A support person is to provide information, emotional and psychological support, and practical assistance which are often crucial to the recovery of the child

Bysclaw

Aug 27, 2023

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

By sclaw

Related Post

Constitution POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 15 — Scope of Section 15 — The court clarified that Section 15 of the POCSO Act criminalizes the storage or possession of any child pornographic material involving a child, regardless of whether the accused has the intention to share or transmit the material. The court further distinguished between the three distinct offences punishable under Section 15(1), (2), and (3) of the POCSO Act. Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 67B — Scope of Section 67B — The court held that Section 67B of the IT Act criminalizes the publication, transmission, or creation of any material depicting children in sexually explicit acts or conduct — The court clarified that the act of merely viewing or downloading child pornography, without any intention to publish, transmit, or create such material, does not fall within the purview of Section 67B of the IT Act.

Sep 29, 2024 sclaw

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(i) and 342 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 14(3)– The appeal involves a Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) challenging the High Court’s order which set aside the Juvenile Justice Board’s decision and directed the trial to be conducted by the Children’s Court – The core issue is whether the CCL should be tried as a juvenile by the Board or as an adult by the Children’s Court, based on the preliminary assessment reports – The CCL’s counsel argued against the practice of passing orders without detailed reasons, the legality of the orders passed by the Board, and the deprivation of the CCL’s right to appeal – The State’s counsel contended that the Children’s Court can reconsider the Board’s decision and that the time limit for preliminary assessment under the Act is not mandatory – The judgment discusses the relevant provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, the mandatory or directory nature of the time period for preliminary assessment, and the exercise of revisional power by the High Court – The Court examines the procedural anomalies in the Act, the validity of the Board’s orders, and the remedy of appeal available to the appellant – The reasoning includes interpretation of the Act’s provisions, the role of the Board and the Children’s Court, and the application of the rules for preliminary assessment – The Court concludes with directions and reliefs based on the analysis of the arguments and legal provisions involved.

May 12, 2024 sclaw

Acquittal POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Supreme Court found significant discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies, including the victim’s, casting doubt on the prosecution’s version of events – Due to these inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence, the Supreme Court acquitted the appellants, setting aside their convictions and sentences – The judgment emphasizes the importance of credible evidence and the consequences of accusations on the lives of individuals, highlighting the need for careful examination of testimonies in sexual harassment cases.

Mar 12, 2024 sclaw

Categories

Archives

You missed

Developer liable for refund with agreed interest for delayed possession; interest on allottee’s loan not developer’s direct liability, though loan financing can be a factor in awarding general compensation

Jun 12, 2025 sclaw

Constitution of India — Article 20(3) — Right Against Self-Incrimination — Constitutional Validity of Narco-Analysis Test — Forced Tests Raise Serious Questions — Involuntary Administration Hit by Article 20(3) – Involuntary Narco-Analysis Test — Contravention of Rights — Results Not ‘Material Evidence’ — Violates ‘Substantive Due Process’ — Breaches Privacy Boundaries.

Jun 11, 2025 sclaw

C P C Railways Act

Demand notices for misdeclaration of goods under Section 66 of the Railways Act, 1989 are valid even if raised after delivery of goods, unlike punitive charges for overloading which must be recovered before delivery.

Jun 10, 2025 sclaw

High Court’s power under Section 482 CrPC is limited to determining a prima facie case from the FIR, without appreciating defence evidence or conducting a mini-trial.

Jun 10, 2025 sclaw