POCSO Archives - Supreme Court of India Judgements

January 18, 2026 8:34 am

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) — Sections 5(l), 6, 9(g), 10 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Sections 65(1), 74, 137(2), 352 — Cancellation of Bail — Allegations of repeated aggravated penetrative sexual assault (gang rape) of a minor victim aged 14, committed under armed threat (katta), and recording the act for blackmail — High Court granting bail set aside by Supreme Court — Bail order found to suffer from serious infirmities as it failed to consider the heinous nature and gravity of the offence, the statutory rigour of the POCSO Act, and prima facie material (victim’s statement and medico-legal report) establishing the commission of the offence — Omission to notice the filing of the chargesheet prior to the bail order rendered the exercise of discretion erroneous. (Paras 4, 8.1, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 44 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH X Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — Misuse of Law — Judicial Notice — The court acknowledges the recurring concern regarding the misuse of the POCSO Act, particularly in cases involving consensual adolescent relationships where the victim’s age may be manipulated, or the law is weaponized for revenge or to oppose relationships. — While judicial vigilance against misuse is important, the court deferred to the legislature on considering steps to curb the menace, such as introducing a “Romeo-Juliet clause” exempting genuine adolescent relationships or enacting mechanisms to prosecute persons who misuse the law to settle scores. (Paras 19)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 47 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. ANURUDH AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal…

POCSO

Goa Children’s Act, 2003 — Section 8(2) and Section 2(m) — Child Abuse — Conviction unsustainable — Accused allegedly casually hit injured child with own son’s school bag — No evidence of deliberate maltreatment, cruelty, exploitation or ill-treatment intended to cause harm — Act exceeded mere incidental quarrel — Medical examination could not rule out possibility of injury from fall — High Court also reduced sentence substantially — Held, conviction for child abuse not made out.

Aug 31, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1041 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANTOSH SAHADEV KHAJNEKAR Vs. THE STATE OF GOA ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No(s).…

I P C POCSO

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 376(2), 450 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Sexual assault on a minor — Evidence of prosecutrix — Conviction can be based solely on the prosecutrix’s testimony if it inspires confidence — Corroboration of testimony of prosecutrix is not a requirement of law, but a guidance of prudence — Minor contractions or small discrepancies should not be a ground for throwing out the evidence of the prosecutrix.

Aug 9, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 929 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEPAK KUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. …..of…

POCSO

POCSO Act, 2012 and Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Offences under — Suspension of sentence — High Court’s refusal to suspend sentence was based on general gravity of offence and complicity of appellant, without applying correct principles for suspension of fixed-term sentences, leading to setting aside of order and remand for fresh consideration.

Aug 9, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 944 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AASIF @ PASHA Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal…

Cr P C POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) — Sections 3/4(2), 42 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376(3) — Appeal against suspension of sentence by High Court — Supreme Court held High Court was not justified. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389 — Suspension of Sentence — Scope of — High Court while considering suspension of sentence must adhere to parameters laid down in law — Prima facie satisfaction about chances of acquittal is necessary, not reappreciation of evidence or picking loopholes.

Aug 9, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 935 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAMNALAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and K. V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…of…

POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 6 — Aggravated Penetrative sexual assault — Punishment introduced by 2019 amendment — Retrospective application — Constitution of India — Article 20(1) — Prohibition against ex-post facto laws and enhanced penalty — Offence committed before amended Act came into force — Sentencing under amended provisions violates constitutional bar against imposing greater penalty than that which was permissible at the time of commission of the offence.

Jul 27, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 892 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATAURAM MANDAVI Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Section 376 (3) IPC — Rape — Conviction upheld — Evidence of victim’s mother and medical evidence — Reliability of victim’s mother’s testimony confirmed despite lengthy cross-examination, finding it natural and trustworthy and corroborated by other witnesses and medical evidence — Medical evidence, though partially presented by defense, conclusively supported sexual assault, citing perineal tear and abrasions around anus

Jun 29, 2025 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAMBHU YADAV Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR ( Before : Sandeep Mehta and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. ) Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9155…

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

2024 INSC 716 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JUST RIGHTS FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. S. HARISH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya…

POCSO

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

2024 INSC 387 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW THROUGH HIS MOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before…

You missed

Stamp Act

Andhra Pradesh Stamp Act — Schedule I-A, Article 47A, Explanation I — Agreement to Sell — Deemed Conveyance — For an agreement to sell to be deemed a conveyance under Explanation I, the delivery of possession must be linked to the agreement to sell, either following it or evidenced by it. If possession existed prior to the agreement and was not surrendered or changed because of the agreement, it does not fall under this Explanation.

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

C P C

Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 41(h) — Injunction when refused — Equally efficacious remedy — A suit for mandatory injunction for removal of a wall is barred if the plaintiff has not claimed possession, and possession is disputed, as a suit for possession would be a more efficacious remedy.

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 197, 245Q, 245R(2)(iii) — Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Mauritius, Article 13(4) — Capital Gains Tax — Advance Ruling — Tax Avoidance — The Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) rejected an application for an advance ruling on the grounds that the transaction (sale of shares of a Singapore company by a Mauritius company) was prima facie designed for tax avoidance — The High Court overturned this decision, holding the assessee was entitled to treaty benefits and that their income was not chargeable in India — The Supreme Court is examining whether the AAR was correct in rejecting the applications for advance ruling on maintainability grounds.

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 7 — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of CIRP — Adjudicating Authority’s power and duty — Legal position is well-settled that once the Adjudicating Authority is satisfied that a financial debt exists and a default has occurred, it must admit the application — Inquiry under Section 7(5)(a) is confined strictly to determination of debt and default, leaving no scope for equitable or discretionary considerations — Reliance on Vidarbha Industries is misconceived; it is a narrow exception confined to its peculiar facts — Admission under Section 7 remains mandatory once debt and default are established — Any alleged non-cooperation by the financial creditor occurred subsequent to the default and cannot absolve the corporate debtor of its admitted failure to comply with its payment obligations. (Paras 12.3, 12.6, 12.9, 12.10)

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

Category: POCSO

You missed