HC Opines: Section-12 POCSO Act is a cognizable and non-bailable offence [Read Judgment]

The Delhi High Court has resolved the ambiguity and categorized Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “POCSO”) as a cognizable and non-bailable offence observing that the maximum punishment that can be awarded is 3 years and hence, the offence would fall within the ambit of the second category of Part II of Schedule I of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “CrPC”). 

Brief Facts: 

The present writ petition styled as Public Interest Litigation has been filed to resolve the conundrum around the classification of Section 12 of POCSO as a bailable or a non-bailable offence. 

Observations of the Court:

Section 12 POCSO provides for imprisonment extendable up to three years in case of sexual harassment inflicted on a child. Now, schedule II Part II CrPC stipulates that the offence would be cognizable and non-bailable if the punishment is imprisonment for 3 years but not more than 7 years. The offence would be non-cognizable and bailable if imprisonment is for less than 3 years. 

The primary issue is that Section 12 POCSO provides for imprisonment extendable up to 3 years which means that it can either be a cognizable and non-bailable offence or non-cognizable and bailable. 

The decision of the Court:

Applying the similar rationale as laid in the case of Knit Pro International v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. (2022 SCC OnLine SC 668) , the High Court opined that Section 12 POCSO will fall within the ambit of the second category of Part II of Schedule I of CrPC i.e., cognizable and non-bailable offence. 

The reason behind this is that the maximum punishment that can be awarded in the case of Section 12 is 3 years and hence, the offence would be categorized as a cognizable and non-bailable offence. 

Accordingly, the Delhi High Court settled the ambiguity and disposed of the PIL. 

Case Title: R.K. Tarun v. Union of India & Ors. 

Coram: Hon’ble the Chief Justice, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad 

Case No.: W.P.(C) 5434/2017 

Advocate for Petitioner: Petitioner-in-Person

Advocates for Respondents: Advs. Mr. Anil Soni, Mr. Rahul Mourya, Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Ms. Swati Kwatra 

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com