IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus

Citation: [2024] 8 S.C.R. 575 · Decided: 20-08-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY S. OKA · Disposal: Directions issued

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 8 S.C.R. 575 : 2024 INSC 614
In Re: Right To Privacy of Adolescents
(Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2023)
20 August 2024
[Abhay S. Oka* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
(i) When a Court deals with an appeal against an order of conviction, 
what are the essentials, which a judgment must contain; (ii) What 
was the duty of the High Court while ascertaining the offences u/s.6 
of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 & 
Section 376 of the IPC and Can an act that is an offence punishable 
under the POSCO Act be described as “a romantic relationship”; 
(iii) Whether the High Court can exercise the plenary powers to 
quash the order of conviction on the grounds of settlement or by 
consent; (iv) Whether the State was under an obligation to take 
care of the victim of an offence under the POCSO Act, who was 
fourteen years old; (v) Implementation of the provisions of section 
19(6) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 
and the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of 
Children) Act, 2015; (vi) Importance of rehabilitation of the victims 
of offences under the POCSO Act.
Headnotes†
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.6 – 
Penal Code, 1860 – s.376(2)(n) – Conviction under – The 
accused, twenty-five years old, enticed victim, fourteen year 
old, to leave her house – A female child was born to the 
victim – Admittedly, the accused is the biological father of the 
child – The Special Judge appointed under the POCSO Act, 
convicted the accused for the offences punishable u/s. 6 of 
the POCSO Act and under s.363, s.366, under clause (n) of 
sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of s.376 of the IPC – By 
the impugned judgment, the High Court held that the offences 
punishable u/s. 363 and s.366 of the IPC were not made out, and 
also set aside the conviction of the accused for the offences 
punishable u/s. 6 of the POCSO Act and sub-sections 2(n) 
and (3) of s.376 of the IPC – Correctness:
Held: In this case, there is no dispute about the fact that the accused 
committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim – As the victim 
became pregnant as a consequence of the sexual assault, in view 
* Author
576
[2024] 8 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
of sub-clause (ii) of clause (j) of Section 5 of the POCSO Act, it 
became a case of aggravated penetrative sexual assault – On facts, 
there cannot be any dispute that the commission of the offence 
punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act by the accused was 
duly proved – Under Section 375 of the IPC, having penetrative 
intercourse with a victim who is under 18 years of age with or 
without her consent becomes an offence of rape – As the offence 
was repeatedly committed on the victim, clause (n) of sub-section 
(2) of Section 376 of the IPC is attracted – Therefore, the accused 
was liable to be punished in accordance with Section 376(2)(n) of 
the IPC – As far as offences u/ss.363, 366 are concerned, in the 
instant case, there is no evidence to prove that the accused took the 
victim out of the keeping of the lawful guardian – Similarly, there is no 
evidence of enticing the victim – The mother of the victim deposed 
that the victim left her house on her own – That is also the version 
of the victim – Hence, the prosecution did not establish kidnapping –  
The offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC 
are not made out – The findings and observations in the impugned 
judgment of the High Court, except the finding on the applicability of 
Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC, cannot be sustained – Thus, the 
impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside and the judgment 
of the Special Court is restored to the extent of the conviction of 
the accused for the offences punishable under sub-sections (2)(n) 
and (3) of Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO 
Act – Accordingly, the accused stands convicted – The acquittal of 
the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 
366 of the IPC is confirmed. [Paras 10, 11, 12, 44(a)]
Judgment – When a Court deals with an appeal against an 
order of conviction, what are the essentials, which a judgment 
must contain:
Held: When a Court deals with an appeal against an order of 
conviction, the judgment must contain (i) a concise statement of 
the facts of the case, (ii) the nature of the evidence adduced by 
the prosecution and the defence, if any, (iii) the submissions made 
by the parties

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.