Orissa High Court Reduces Detention Period Of Juvenile Accused Of Committing 'Unnatural Offence' Against 4-Year-Old Boy

The Court was hearing a Criminal Revision filed by the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL), challenging the judgment that affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of the Juvenile Justice Board, where he was found guilty and ordered to go to place of safety for a period of two years for the offence under Section 377 of the IPC and two years for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act which would run concurrently.

The bench of Justice S.K. Panigrahi observed, “…Petitioner/ CCL is directed to go to the place of safety, Berhampur for a period already spent by him in the place of safety.”

Advocate Manas Kumar Chand appeared for the Appellant and AGA Satyajit Mishra appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

In the present case, a complaint was filed alleging that his 4-year-old son was sexually assaulted by a minor who took the child to a secluded spot and put his penis in the child's mouth and later put it in his anus. CCL threatened the child with harm if he disclosed the incident to anyone. A case was registered under Section 377/506 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act. The Juvenile Justice Board found the minor guilty which was upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge. Hence, the present Criminal Revision.

The Court said that the evidence of the victim is clear, cogent and trustworthy and in such circumstances, there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and order of detention passed by the Juvenile Justice Board.

The Court further said that since the date of occurrence, the Petitioner/ CCL has been in custody for a substantial period, and only three to four months remain to complete and undergo the sentence.

The Court said that it shall not be desirable to keep the Petitioner/ CCL in jail. Therefore, it said that the sentence already suffered by the Petitioner/CCL shall serve the ends of justice.

Accordingly, while dismissing the Criminal Revision and confirming the order of detention passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and the judgment of the Appellate Court, the Court modified the order of detention.