Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
An Act to protect children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography and provide for establishment of Special Courts for trial of such offences and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
27 Supreme Court judgments considering this law. Search within these.
-
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction was dismissed by the High Court…
-
Akhtar Ali @ Ali Akhtar @ Shamim @ Raja Ustad v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the conviction of the appellants, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, deserves to be upheld or whether they are entitled to acquittal.
-
Jamnalal v. State of Rajasthan and Another
In the instant appeal, the father of the prosecutrix challenges the order of the High Court. By the said order, the sentence imposed on respondent no.2 herein was suspended till the final disposal of the appeal. Whether the High…
-
Aasif @ Pasha v. The State of U.P. & Ors.
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court by which it declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the trial court against the appellant.
-
Deepak Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
The appellant came to be convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable u/ss.450 and 376(2) of the IPC and s.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act]. Whether the High Court was justified in…
-
Bhanei Prasad @ Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Matter pertains to correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of conviction of the father u/s.6 POCSO Act and s.506 IPC and imposition of life imprisonment, for committing sexual assault of his own…
-
Satauram Mandavi v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr.
Matter pertains to the retrospective application of the amended provision-s.6 POCSO Act, to the incident which took place prior to the amendment.
-
Jai Prakash v. State of Uttarakhand
Allegation against the appellant herein that he committed a forceful rape and strangulated a 10 year old girl child. The punishment handed down to the appellant by the Courts below was of death penalty. Whether the conviction and…
-
IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus
Issue arose as regards sentencing the accused; about the rehabilitation of the victim and her child; and about adopting measures for adolescent well being and child protection.
-
Waris v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether Trial Court ought to have given proper time and opportunity to the legal aid defence counsel to prepare the matter and should have deferred the cross-examination of PW-1 by a reasonable time so as to ensure fairness in…
-
X Etc. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
Whether the High Court erred in quashing FIRs registered under the POCSO Act against the respondent no.1.
-
S.C. Narang v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Issue arose whether the Chairman of Managing Committee which runs the school can be punished for offence of cruelty to the child u/s.75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
-
Sachin v. State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether, the High Court could enhance the sentence under its revisional powers in a convict’s appeal against conviction.
-
Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P.
Whether the conviction of the appellant ought to have been recorded under the IPC or whether the provisions of the Special law, i.e., Section 42A of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, would prevail thereby,…
-
Karandeep Sharma @ Razia @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant-accused for the kidnapping, rape/sexual assault and murder of a minor is sustainable.
-
Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati v. State of Madhya Pradesh
In a case where the trial court relied upon the DNA report, whether the non-examination of the scientific experts involved in the process of conducting DNA profiling examination and issuing the report, led to the failure of…
-
P. Manikandan v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in directing re-investigation and retrial of the same offence on the same set of facts, after acquitting the accused by giving him the benefit of doubt; Whether, in the attending fact and…
-
Mahesh Damu Khare v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
The High Court dismissed the petition filed u/s.482 of CrPC for quashing FIR registered u/ss.376, 420, 504 and 506 IPC holding, inter alia, that the offence under Section 376 of IPC is an offence against the society which would…
-
Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Issue arose as regards whether a third party to a criminal proceeding got locus standi to challenge the order quashing the FIR lodged against the teacher by the father of the minor victim under the Penal Code, POCSO Act and SC/ST…
-
Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Petitioner, an NGO raised significant concerns as regards prevelance of child marriages and failure of authorities to prevent them despite the enactment of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. Sought issuance of effective…
-
Just Rights for Children Alliance & Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors.
What is the scope of Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO); what is the underlying distinction between sub-section(s) (1), (2) and (3) respectively of the POCSO; whether, mere viewing,…
-
Rabbu @ Sarvesh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The appellant was convicted for offences punishable u/ss. 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A and 302 r/w. s.34 of IPC and s.5(g)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) awarding death penalty u/ss. 376A and…
-
IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus
(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…
-
Thirumoorthy v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police
Appellant-accused, a Child in Conflict with Law on the date of the incident was convicted and sentenced u/ss.363, 342, 302, 201 r/w 302, IPC and s.6, POCSO Act. Trial, conviction and sentence of the appellant, if was vitiated on…
-
Rajasekar v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police
The appellant who was convicted for offence u/ss. 3(a) r/w s. 4 of the POCSO Act, and was awarded the sentence of ten years RI alongwith a fine, the quantum of sentence awarded, if justified.
-
Bhaggi @ Bhagirath @ Naran v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The capital punishment awarded to the petitioner-convict for the conviction u/s. 376 AB, IPC was not confirmed and it was commuted to imprisonment for life, which, going by the provisions thereunder, means imprisonment for the…
- Pappu v. The State of Uttar Pradesh