Incestuous Sexual Violence

Source: Supreme Court 

Why in News? 

The bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta in the case of Bhanei Prasad @ Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2025) dismissed a Special Leave Petition challenging conviction under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), while ordering substantial compensation for the child victim and emphasizing constitutional duty to protect vulnerable children. 

• The Supreme Court's judgment reaffirms that incestuous sexual violence cannot be condoned under any circumstances as it fundamentally undermines the foundation of familial trust. 

What was the Background of Bhanei Prasad @ Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2025) Case? 

• The petitioner (father) was convicted by Trial Court for repeatedly committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon his minor daughter, aged around 10 years. 
• The conviction was under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 
• The High Court of Himachal Pradesh affirmed the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment in Criminal Appeal No.562 of 2019 through judgment dated 3rd July 2024. 
• The acts were sustained, deliberate assaults within the home environment over a period of time. 
• The victim's testimony was corroborated by her elder sister and supported by compelling forensic and medical records including DNA evidence. 
• The petitioner sought special leave to appeal and interim bail relief from the Supreme Court. 

What were the Court's Observations? 

On Evidence and Conviction: 

• The Court noted that Section 29 of POCSO Act creates statutory presumption of guilt once foundational facts are established, which remained unrebutted in this case. 
• The victim's testimony was found "unwavering, medically corroborated, and free from embellishment." 
• DNA report "sealed the evidentiary chain and dispelled all doubts in the prosecution case." 
• The Court emphasized that testimony of child victim, if credible and trustworthy, requires no corroboration. 

On False Implication Argument: 

• The Court rejected the argument that petitioner was falsely implicated due to strained domestic relationships, stating: "No daughter, however aggrieved, would fabricate charges of this magnitude against her own father merely to escape household discipline." 

On Nature of the Crime: 

• The Court characterized the offence as "unspeakable betrayal of trust by none other than the father of the victim." 
• When perpetrator is the father, "the crime assumes a demonic character." 
• Such offences "deserve nothing but the severest condemnation and deterrent punishment." 

On Bail Denial: 

• The Court's "judicial conscience does not permit casual indulgence" in bail where conviction is rendered after full trial and affirmed in appeal. 
• In serious POCSO offences involving familial betrayal, "relief cannot be granted as a matter of routine." 

Compensation Order: 

• Directed payment of Rs. 10,50,000/- to victim by State of Himachal Pradesh. 
• Rs. 7,00,000/- to be kept in fixed deposit for 5 years with quarterly interest withdrawal rights. 
• Rs. 3,50,000/- to be directly transferred to the victim's account. 
• Process to be monitored by Himachal Pradesh State Legal Services Authority.

What is POCSO Act, 2012?

• About: 
  • The POCSO Act, enacted in 2012, stands as a landmark legislation aimed at safeguarding children from sexual abuse and exploitation. 
  • It addresses the vulnerability of children and aims to ensure their safety and well-being. 
  • It was enacted in consonance of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations which was acceded by the Government of India on the 11th December, 1992.
• Preamble: 
  • It is an act to protect children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography. 
    • And provide for the establishment of Special Courts for trial of such offences and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
• Major Dates: 
  • Its enactment date is 19^th June 2012 whereas the POSCO was enforced on 14^th November 2012.
• Key Provisions Referred: 
  • Section 6 - Punishment for Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault: 
    • Minimum 20 years rigorous imprisonment, extendable to life imprisonment or death. 
    • Mandatory fine to be paid to victim for medical expenses and rehabilitation. 
  • Section 29 - Presumption as to Certain Offences: 
    • Special Court presumes accused's guilt in cases under Sections 3, 5, 7, and 9. 
    • The burden of proof shifts to the accused to prove innocence. 
    • The Act mandates the establishment of Special Courts for speedy trial of cases. 
    • It provides for rehabilitation and compensation of child victims.