Chance of influencing witnesses after bail in POCSO cases real: SC
The Supreme Court of India has recently expressed its concern over the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses after the grant of bail in offences involving sexual assault against children, commonly referred to as POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) cases. This concern was raised as the court cancelled the bail granted by the Allahabad High Court to a youth from Shamli in Uttar Pradesh, accused of repeated penetrative sexual assault under armed intimidation of a minor.
The case in question highlights the gravity of the situation and the need for stringent measures to prevent any attempts to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. The accused, who was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court, was alleged to have committed a heinous crime against a minor, and the grant of bail had raised concerns about the potential for evidence tampering or witness intimidation.
The Supreme Court, while cancelling the bail, observed that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses after the grant of bail in POCSO cases is a legitimate and grave concern. This concern is not unfounded, as POCSO cases often involve vulnerable victims and witnesses who may be susceptible to intimidation or coercion.
The POCSO Act, which was enacted in 2012, provides for stringent penalties for those found guilty of committing sexual offences against children. The Act also provides for special provisions for the protection of victims and witnesses, including the use of video conferencing for recording statements and the provision of counselling and support services.
Despite these provisions, there are still concerns about the ability of accused persons to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, particularly in cases where the accused is granted bail. The grant of bail can provide the accused with the opportunity to intimidate or coerce witnesses, or to destroy or tamper with evidence, which can have serious implications for the outcome of the case.
The Supreme Court’s decision to cancel the bail in this case highlights the need for caution when dealing with POCSO cases. The court’s observation that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses is a legitimate and grave concern underscores the importance of ensuring that the accused is not given the opportunity to interfere with the investigation or the trial.
In recent years, there have been several instances of accused persons in POCSO cases attempting to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. In some cases, the accused have been found to have used their influence or resources to intimidate witnesses or to destroy evidence, which can have serious consequences for the victim and their family.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case is a welcome step towards ensuring that POCSO cases are dealt with in a fair and impartial manner. The court’s observation that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses is a legitimate and grave concern highlights the need for vigilance and caution when dealing with these cases.
In order to prevent evidence tampering or witness intimidation, it is essential that the investigation and trial of POCSO cases are conducted in a thorough and transparent manner. This can involve the use of video conferencing for recording statements, the provision of counselling and support services to victims and witnesses, and the use of special measures to protect the identity and security of victims and witnesses.
Furthermore, the grant of bail in POCSO cases should be subject to strict conditions, including the requirement that the accused should not attempt to contact or intimidate witnesses, and that they should not attempt to destroy or tamper with evidence. The court should also ensure that the accused is monitored closely while on bail, to prevent any attempts to interfere with the investigation or the trial.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision to cancel the bail in this case highlights the importance of ensuring that POCSO cases are dealt with in a fair and impartial manner. The court’s observation that the likelihood of evidence tampering or influencing witnesses is a legitimate and grave concern underscores the need for vigilance and caution when dealing with these cases. By taking strict measures to prevent evidence tampering or witness intimidation, we can ensure that justice is served and that the rights of victims and witnesses are protected.
About the Author
