POCSO case: ‘We don’t pass orders just for fun’, says Supreme Court; raps UP Government for delay in examining victim
Satya Prakash
New Delhi, July 4
Noting that it does not pass an order “just for fun”, the Supreme Court has pulled up the Uttar Pradesh Government for failing to comply with its order on examination of a minor victim of sexual assault under POCSO Act by June 30.
Giving one week to the prosecution to examine the victim in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act case, a Vacation Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice A Amanullah warned that it would summon the state home secretary, if the order was not complied with.
“Our order was a mandatory order, it was to be followed in letter and spirit. We are not passing orders just for fun,” Justice Amanullah told senior advocate Garima Prasad, who represented the Uttar Pradesh Government.
“We are seeing it happening day in and day out … every state counsel is taking our orders casually. If it is not done within one week, we will call your home secretary here. We are at fault for letting these things happen … the fault is on our part. The message has to go (out),” the Bench said while hearing a bail plea of a man accused of raping a 16-year-old minor girl.
The top court’s comments came after Prasad sought adjournment on the ground that the victim’s evidence could not be recorded as there was a condolence meeting at the trial court.
Noting that the state counsel was very casual in approach, the Bench said since it was a “mandatory order”, the prosecution should have filed a petition for extension of time.
“Be very careful in court. Now we are going to take serious note of this. It was your duty to file a proper application for extension of time,” the Bench told Prasad even as it granted one more week to the prosecution to examine the victim.
The accused has challenged the November 30, 2023, Allahabad High Court order rejecting his bail plea, contending none of the material witnesses had been examined. An FIR dated September 19, 2023, alleged that the accused sexually assaulted the minor repeatedly for over six months.
