The Supreme Court on Thursday directed police and courts to carefully vet Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act complaints against husbands or their family members in matrimonial disputes, and ordered that a child psychiatrist interact with the victim before arrest in cases where there is no “palpable” material against the accused.
The court said that such a measure shall be resorted to in cases where there is no “palpable” material against the accused and the police is in a dilemma if there is “reason to believe” to arrest the husband or his family members under Pocso offences. Upon interaction with the victim, a report shall be filed by the experts with the police or SJPU, which will then consider how to proceed with the matter, the court said.
To arrive at this conclusion, the court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct an enquiry into the victim child’s allegations. In April this year, the court handed over the probe to CBI which, along with two experts from NIMHANS Bengaluru, concluded, “The testimony of the victim does not appear reliable or trustworthy. Based on their report, the court quashed the criminal case. Before handing over the physical custody of the child to the father, the court sent the matter back to the Family Court to smoothly ensure the process of re-integration in the best interest of the child.
This serves two ends – the accused suffers prolonged incarceration and such an accusation adversely affects guardianship or custody proceedings, the court said as it went on to quash the criminal proceedings under Pocso registered in 2024 against the husband. In the case before the court, the child was born in 2015 and after the marriage between the spouses was dissolved in 2023, the father initiated a case for the child’s custody in which he was successful in June 2023. In March 2024, the child’s mother filed the Pocso case naming the husband.
Besides the incalculable harm caused to the child victim, the court said, “The only objective is to tie up the accused spouse and their family members in knots with the foisted criminal case and ensure that they are kept busy with the court process for a considerable period. An expert team of child psychologists interacted with the victim and what came out was an “eye opener” for the court as the allegations were found to be false and the evidence non-supportive of the charges levelled by the child’s mother.
The court felt the need to introduce this safeguard after it came across a case from Bengaluru where a mother filed a case under the Pocso Act against her husband after she lost a bitter and prolonged custody battle.
