Why did the Supreme Court stress adherence to the statutory timelines under the POCSO Act, 2012?
Coram: Bela M. Trivedi; Prasanna B. Varale
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Statutory trial timelines — Exclusive special POCSO courts — Suo motu writ jurisdiction — Institutional directions — Closure of proceedings — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Exclusive special courts — Centrally-funded scheme — Held: Where a district has more than one hundred pending cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, an exclusive special court trying only POCSO offences must be set up under a centrally-funded scheme covering the presiding officer, prosecutors, support persons and child-friendly infrastructure. (¶3) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Statutory timelines — Priority creation of courts — Held further: The timelines the Act stipulates for every stage from investigation to trial must be adhered to; where a shortage of exclusive courts causes those timelines to be missed, dedicated POCSO courts must be created on a priority basis. (¶6) Suo motu writ jurisdiction — Institutional directions — Closure — Held further: The Union and the States must sensitise investigating officials, ensure prompt forensic reports and see that chargesheets are filed and trials completed within the statutory period; with these directions reiterated, the suo motu proceedings stand closed. (¶6, 8)
When must a district have an exclusive special court for cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012?
Where a district has more than 100 pending POCSO cases, an exclusive or designated special court must be set up to try only POCSO offences. It is funded under a central scheme that covers the presiding officer, special public prosecutors, support persons, court staff and child-friendly infrastructure including vulnerable-witness court rooms.
Why did the Supreme Court stress adherence to the statutory timelines under the POCSO Act, 2012?
The Act stipulates timelines for every stage from investigation up to trial, and these must be adhered to as far as possible. The Court found that the inadequate number of exclusive courts was causing those mandated timelines to be missed, so dedicated courts had to be created on priority and chargesheets and trials completed within the statutory period.
What did the Court direct about forensic science laboratories in POCSO cases?
Identifying delay in forensic reports as a major cause of delay, the Court expected States to establish dedicated Forensic Science Laboratories for POCSO cases and directed that existing laboratories analyse POCSO samples effectively and send their reports promptly, with the Chief Secretaries ensuring compliance.
What was the outcome of the suo motu proceedings on the rise in child rape cases?
Recording that most States had, with central funding, set up exclusive POCSO courts while some (including Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Orissa and Maharashtra) still needed more, and reiterating its directions on timelines and dedicated courts, the Court closed the suo motu proceedings.
Prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment.
One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
LexStreak turns the Supreme Court's output into a five-minute daily read for advocates — plain-language headnotes, the questions each judgment settles, and the full text when you need it.
Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India
This Court vide the order dated 12.07.2019 had directed the Registry to register a Suo Moto Writ Petition under the caption “In Re Alarming rise in the number of reported child rape incidents,” and requested the Learned Senior Counsel Mr. V. Giri to assist the Court in formulating the directions that may be required to be issued. The said cognizance was taken by the Court in view of the various news reports with regard to the increase of child rape cases in India. Accordingly, the Court after hearing the Learned Amicus Curiae Mr. V. Giri, the Solicitor General Mr. Tushar Mehta and the Registrar Mr. Rathi, on the timely completion of investigations and consequential Trials of the offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) gave certain directions vide the Order dated 25.07.2019. The said directions are reproduced hereinbelow: -
ORDER
“Having considered the matter, we have deemed it proper to issue the following directions, which will be implemented by the Union of India and the State Governments forthwith: - (i) In each district of the country, if there are more than 100 cases under the POCSO Act, an exclusive/designated special Court will be set up, which will try no other offence except those under the POCSO Act. (ii) Such Courts will be set up under a Central scheme and will be funded by the Central Government, which fund will not only take care of the appointment of the Presiding Officer, but also the appointments of support persons, Special Public Prosecutors, Court staff and infrastructure including creation of child friendly environment and vulnerable witness Court rooms, etc. (iii) While drawing up the panel(s) of support persons in each district which should not exceed a reasonable number keeping in mind the total number of cases to be tried by the special Court to be set up in each district, care should be taken to appoint persons who are dedicated to the cause and apart from academic qualifications are oriented towards child rights; are sensitive to the needs of a child and are otherwise child friendly. The same standards would also apply in the matter of appointment of Special Public Prosecutors. (iv) The following suggestions of the learned Amicus Curiae shall also be implemented by the Ministry of Women and Child Development through such agency as may be considered appropriate: - “(e) A short clip intended to spread an awareness of the subject in general, namely, prevention of child abuse and prosecution of crimes against children, should necessarily be screened in every movie hall and could also be transmitted by various television channels at regular intervals. A child helpline number should also be displayed not only in such clip but also at various other prominent places, in schools and other public places.” From the reports of the learned Amicus Curiae, it appears to us that one of the major causes of delay in winding up the investigations and in cases where chargesheets have been filed, in winding up the trial, is delay in receipt of the reports from the Forensic Science Laboratory. The learned Amicus Curiae’s suggestion is that there should be designated Forensic Science Laboratories in every district of the country for the purposes of the POCSO Act. We are of the view that the said suggestion could await orders of the Court at a later stage. For the present, we direct the Directors of the State Forensic Science Laboratories and the concerned authority in the State Government to ensure that the existing and available Forensic Science Laboratories in each State will function in an effective manner insofar as analysis etc. of the samples collected under the POCSO Act are concerned and reports of such analysis be sent promptly and without any delay. The Chief Secretaries of all the States and Union Territories are directed to ensure that the above direction of the Court is complied with forthwith.”
Subsequently, various directions came be to issued from time to time calling upon the States and the Registrar Generals of all High Courts to furnish the information mentioned in the said Order. On 13.11.2019, the Registrar of Supreme Court submitted a Report detailing percentage share of different types of POCSO offences, upon which the Court directed the State Governments and Union of India to do the needful to ensure that all stages of investigation as well as of the Trials, as contemplated under the POCSO Act, are complied within the timeframe. The Court also directed the Union of India and the State Governments to take steps for sensitization of officials associated with the investigation and also for creation or assignment of dedicated Courts to try POCSO Cases on top priority.
With regard to setting up of exclusive POCSO Courts in the country, this Court noticing that there were large number of POCSO Cases pending throughout the country laid down the parameters to be followed and gave directions for setting up exclusive POCSO Courts in each State. The Court laid down separate criteria for the States of Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal where the pendency of POCSO Cases was extremely high, vide the Order dated 16.12.2019. The Court had also expressed its desire to consider the issue of framing National scheme for payment of compensation to the victims of offences under the POCSO Act.
During the course of hearing of the issues involved, the Court had also expected the State Governments to establish dedicated Forensic Science Laboratories for POCSO Cases to expedite the investigation and had also expressed grave concern about the inadequate number of Public Prosecutors in the POCSO Courts. The issues with regard to providing security to the Victim and the Witnesses in Unnao Case were also addressed by passing necessary orders.
It appears that the matter remained pending for quite a long time for consideration of the issues to be addressed to by the State Governments and the High Courts. On 24.09.2024, the Court requested the Amicus Curiae Mr. V. Giri and also Sr. Advocate Ms. Uttara Babbar to submit State-wise details with regard to the Status of the POCSO Courts in view of the earlier directions given by the Court from time to time. Accordingly, they have submitted a brief note of Submissions as also the Chart showing the Status as regards the POCSO Cases pending in the POCSO Courts under each of the High Courts. Having regard to the Chart showing the Status of POCSO Cases and POCSO Courts in each State, it appears that majority of the States with the funding from the Central government have complied with the directions issued by the Court for setting up exclusive courts for POCSO cases, however, in certain States like Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Orissa, Maharashtra etc., there is still a need to create more POCSO Courts considering the pendency of the POCSO cases.
In our opinion, since the timelines have been stipulated under the POCSO Act for all stages right from the stage of Investigation up to the stage of Trial, the same must be adhered to as far as possible. Because of the inadequacy of the number of exclusive Courts for the POCSO Cases, the said timelines mandated in the Act for completion of the trials are not being maintained. It is therefore expected that the Union of India and the State Governments shall take appropriate steps to sensitize the officials associated with the investigation of POCSO cases, and also to create dedicated Courts to try POCSO Cases on top priority basis, and to see to it that the chargesheets are filed within the mandatory period stipulated in the Act, and the Trials are completed within the time frame as contemplated in the Act.
We would be failing in our duty, if we do not place on record, our appreciation for the very able assistance rendered by the learned Senior Counsels Mr. V. Giri and Ms. Babbar during this Suo Moto proceedings.
Subject to the above, the Suo-Moto proceedings need to be closed and are hereby closed. ……..…………………………. J. [BELA M. TRIVEDI] ……..…………………………. J. [PRASANNA B. VARALE] NEW DELHI, MAY 15th, 2025
Under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, does a spouse's persistent refusal of sexual relations amount to mental cruelty?
2026 INSC 620 · Supreme Court of India
Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, must a civil court frame issues where the defendant offers no defence at the first hearing of the suit?
2026 INSC 378 · Supreme Court of India
The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 has no provision corresponding to Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Can the Commissioner nevertheless make the insurer jointly and severally liable with the employer?
2025 INSC 1239 · Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court decides something every day. Read one a day.
A free account gets you the day's judgments in your practice areas, a reading streak, and folders to keep what matters.
Start reading freeHeadnote and questions prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk · Report an error · Privacy