HC allows Pocso victim’s recall for cross-examination

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has allowed the recall of a Pocso victim for cross-examination on the ground that she is no longer a minor.

The statute mandates conclusion of trial within 60 days and examination of the victim within 30 days of the filing of final report in Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) cases., “On careful perusal of the order sheet of the trail Court and also the impugned order, it is pertinent to note that the reason assigned by the learned Sessions Judge in refusing to recall PW.1 (prosecution witness number one, the victim) is the victim is a minor child is not called repeatedly to testify in the Court,” the HC noted.

However, the HC noticed that the victim was no longer a minor and another witness had been recalled for cross-examination. “As submitted at Bar, the victim is not a minor, now she is aged about 21 years and also married. The trial Court has considered the genuineness request of the petitioner (accused) and recalled PW.2 for cross-examination. Therefore, I do not find any valid reason in the impugned order refusing to recall PW.1,” the HC said.

The accused, a 22-year-old from Erode in Tamil Nadu, had approached the Karnataka High Court after a trial court in Chamarajanagara rejected his application for recalling the victim-witness for cross-examination. He is an accused in a Pocso case pending in the trial court. His advocate argued in the HC that while the lower court allowed the recalling of another witness, the victim was not allowed to be recalled citing that she is a minor. However, she was no longer a minor and was 21 years old now.

Without cross-examination, his case would suffer. The Government advocate opposed the petition citing that it was a sensitive Pocso case involving a minor and the statute states that the trial itself should be completed within 60 days and the victim’s examination has to be completed within 30 days from date of filing of the final report. “The petitioner cannot take the things granted and make the victim move from the home and the Court for cross-examination,” the advocate argued. Justice TG Shivashankare Gowda, who heard the case said that the victim-witness could be compensated for appearing for cross-examination. “By adequately compensating the victim, the trial Court ought to have recalled PW.1 for cross-examination and the petitioner be directed to cross-examine on the day the PW.1 appears before the Court and also the petition will not get any adjournment, if he fails to cross-examine on the day PW.1 appears. To provide an opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine PW.1, otherwise disposal of the case will not be on merits and it will be one sided. Hence the petition deserves to be allowed,” the Court said. The accused was allowed to cross-examine the victimwitness and ordered to pay Rs.1,000 for it. “The trial Court is directed to recall PW.1 and accused shall crossexamine PW.1 on the very day she appears by paying cost of Rs1,000,” the HC ordered