Alakh Alok Srivastava vs. Union of India and Others, 2018

An eight-month-old female infant became the victim of a heinous sexual crime committed under the provisions of the POCSO Act, 2012.

• Following the assault, the child sustained severe injuries and was admitted to Kalawati Saran Children Hospital in Delhi.
• Given the seriousness of the situation, the Supreme Court issued orders on 31st January, 1st February, and 12th March 2018 directing that a team of doctors from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) be sent to assess and treat the child.
• The Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DLSA) was instructed to accompany the medical team to ensure the child received the best possible care and that her legal rights were protected.
• The medical team examined the child and submitted a report stating that the infant was alert, active, and stable after surgery.
• The child had undergone surgery to treat her injuries and required regular aseptic dressings and continued monitoring.
• The team recommended that the child be transferred to AIIMS for comprehensive care, including support from the Pediatrics, Obstetrics, and Psychiatry departments for both the child and her family.
• The parents consented to the transfer, although they were deeply concerned about their child’s health. The court ensured that all medical expenses would be covered under the Janani Shishu Suraksha Yojana, a government healthcare scheme.
• The child was shifted to AIIMS, where she received advanced medical care.
• A status report filed by the DLSA indicated that the child had been discharged from AIIMS but required another surgery scheduled for 17th April 2018.
• By the time the matter was heard again on 12th March 2018, it was reported that the child had undergone the second surgery and was in a stable condition.
• The Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DLSA) informed the court that an interim compensation of ₹75,000 had been awarded to the child under the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme, 2015.
• The DLSA also provided legal assistance to the family and apprised them of their rights under the Delhi Witness Protection Scheme, 2015 and other relevant laws.

The writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court of India, raising two urgent concerns:

1. Ensuring the best possible medical treatment for the child.
2. Addressing the delays in the judicial process for cases under the POCSO Act, emphasizing the need for speedy trials in child-friendly environments.

Concerns About Speedy Trials Under the POCSO Act

• The petitioner, Mr. Alakh Alok Srivastava, appearing in person, raised the second major issue—the delays in the trial of cases under the POCSO Act.
• He argued that the spirit of the POCSO Act demanded speedy trials to ensure justice for child victims and protect their well-being.
• The petitioner submitted a chart highlighting the large number of pending POCSO cases across various states, including Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, where cases had been pending for over a year.

The writ petition filed before the Supreme Court of India raised two primary issues:

1. Medical Treatment and Rehabilitation of the Victim:

• The first issue concerned the adequate medical treatment and rehabilitation of an eight-month-old female child, who was a victim of a heinous sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
• The court needed to ensure that the child received the best possible medical care, including specialized surgeries, and that her legal rights were protected during this process. 

2. Speedy Trial and Monitoring of POCSO Cases:

• The second issue pertained to the delay in the judicial process for cases under the POCSO Act.
• The petitioner sought the intervention of the Supreme Court to ensure that POCSO cases are tried swiftly in child-friendly courts and that the spirit and intent of the POCSO Act, which emphasizes speedy trials and protection of child victims, were upheld.

In this case, the Supreme Court of India laid down guidelines to be followed by Special Courts while trying a case under the POCSO Act, 2012 so that the trial is completed within a period of one year from the date of taking cognizance of the offence, as provided under Section 35 of the aforementioned Act. The guidelines are provided hereunder:

Directions Issued by the Supreme Court:

To address the delays in POCSO cases and ensure that the legal provisions are implemented in both letter and spirit, the Supreme Court issued the following directions:

• High Courts to Ensure Speedy Trials: High Courts must ensure that POCSO cases are tried and disposed of by Special Courts, and the presiding officers of these courts must be sensitized to issues related to child protection and psychological well-being.
• Establishment of Special Courts: Special Courts should be established in every district, if not already done, and be assigned the responsibility to deal exclusively with POCSO cases.
• Fast-Tracking of Cases: Instructions must be issued to Special Courts to fast-track POCSO cases, avoiding unnecessary adjournments and strictly adhering to the procedures laid down in the Act to complete trials in a time-bound manner.
• Constitution of Monitoring Committees:
  • The Chief Justices of High Courts were requested to constitute committees of three judges to monitor and regulate the progress of trials under the POCSO Act.
  • In High Courts with fewer judges, a single-judge committee should be established for the same purpose.
• Formation of Special Task Forces: The Directors General of Police (DGPs) or officers of equivalent rank in each state were instructed to constitute Special Task Forces to ensure that investigations are conducted thoroughly and that witnesses are produced promptly in court.
• Ensuring Child-Friendly Atmosphere in Courts: High Courts were directed to take adequate steps to ensure a child-friendly atmosphere in Special Courts, in line with the provisions of the POCSO Act, to minimize trauma for child victims.
• Communication of the Order: The Registry of the Supreme Court was directed to communicate this order to the Registrar Generals of all High Courts to ensure immediate implementation of these directions.

Conclusion:

The case highlights the Supreme Court’s proactive role in protecting the rights of child victims of sexual offences and ensuring the efficient functioning of the judicial system in line with the POCSO Act. The court addressed both the immediate medical needs of the infant victim and the broader systemic issues related to delays in POCSO trials, ensuring that justice is delivered sensitively, swiftly, and effectively.

This case became a landmark in highlighting the need for child-sensitive legal procedures and the importance of timely medical and legal interventions for child victims of sexual offences.