Chance of influencing witnesses after bail in POCSO cases real: SC
The Supreme Court of India has recently expressed its concerns over the potential for evidence tampering and influencing of witnesses in cases involving sexual assault against children, particularly those filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court’s remarks came as it cancelled the bail granted by the Allahabad High Court to a youth from Shamli in Uttar Pradesh, who was accused of repeated penetrative sexual assault under armed intimidation of a minor.
The POCSO Act, enacted in 2012, aims to protect children from sexual offences and provides for stringent punishment for those found guilty. The Act also mandates that cases under POCSO be disposed of within a year from the date of filing the complaint. However, despite the stringent laws, the conviction rate in POCSO cases remains low, and one of the primary reasons for this is the tampering of evidence and influencing of witnesses.
The Supreme Court’s observation highlights the gravity of the issue and the need for careful consideration when granting bail in POCSO cases. The court noted that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses after the grant of bail is a legitimate and grave concern, particularly in cases where the accused is in a position of power or influence.
In the present case, the accused was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court, which was later challenged by the state government before the Supreme Court. The top court, while cancelling the bail, observed that the High Court had failed to consider the seriousness of the offence and the potential for evidence tampering.
The Supreme Court’s decision is significant, as it underscores the need for caution when dealing with cases involving sexual assault against children. The court’s observation that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses is a legitimate concern highlights the importance of ensuring that the accused does not get an opportunity to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence.
The POCSO Act provides for a range of measures to prevent evidence tampering and witness intimidation, including the use of special courts, in-camera trials, and the provision of counselling and support services to victims. However, despite these measures, the problem of evidence tampering and witness intimidation persists.
The Supreme Court’s decision is a reminder that the grant of bail in POCSO cases should be considered with caution, and the courts should carefully evaluate the potential risks of evidence tampering and witness intimidation before granting bail. The decision also highlights the need for greater awareness and sensitivity among law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and judges when dealing with cases involving sexual assault against children.
In recent years, there have been several instances where accused persons in POCSO cases have been found to have influenced witnesses or tampered with evidence, resulting in acquittals or reduced sentences. The Supreme Court’s decision is a step towards addressing this issue and ensuring that justice is delivered to the victims of sexual assault.
The POCSO Act has been amended several times since its enactment, with the latest amendment in 2019 providing for the death penalty in cases of aggravated sexual assault against children. However, despite the stringent laws, the problem of sexual assault against children persists, and the conviction rate in POCSO cases remains low.
The Supreme Court’s decision is a reminder that the fight against sexual assault against children requires a multi-faceted approach, involving not just stringent laws but also awareness, education, and sensitivity among all stakeholders. The decision is a step towards ensuring that justice is delivered to the victims of sexual assault and that the accused are held accountable for their crimes.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s observation that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses after the grant of bail is a legitimate concern in POCSO cases highlights the need for caution and careful consideration when dealing with these cases. The decision is a reminder that the grant of bail in POCSO cases should be considered with caution, and the courts should carefully evaluate the potential risks of evidence tampering and witness intimidation before granting bail.
About the Author
