NDLI: Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: ss.5/ 6 – Penal Code, 1860 – s.376(2)(i) – Prosecution case was that the appellant-accused was neighbour of PW-1-informant – On the fateful day, when PW-1 went out of the house, appellant took four year old daughter of PW-1 to the bushes – He removed his own clothes as well as clothes of the victim girl and fondled her private parts and penetrated his finger into the vagina of the victim girl – Some persons spotted the accused and caught him red handed – Trial Court as well as the High Court convicted the accused for the offences under s.5 of the POCSO Act punishable under s.6 of the POCSO Act – On appeal, held: It was established and proved that the accused penetrated his finger in the vagina and because of that the victim girl felt pain and irritation in urination as well as pain in her body – There was redness and swelling around the vagina found by the doctor before whom the victim girl narrated the entire incident – Case fall under s.3(b) of the POCSO Act and it can be said to be penetrative sexual assault – Considering s.5(m) of the POCSO Act as such penetrative sexual assault was committed on a girl child aged four years (below twelve years) the same can be said to be ‘aggravated penetrative sexual assault’ punishable under s.6 of the POCSO Act – Therefore, both, the Trial Court as well as the High Court rightly convicted the accused for the offences under s.5 of the POCSO Act punishable under s.6 of the POCSO Act.Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: Object and purpose of enactment of the POCSO Act – The POCSO Act has been enacted to protect the children from the offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography and to provide for establishment of special courts for trial of such offences and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto – The POCSO Act has been enacted keeping in mind Arts.15 and 39 of the Constitution of India.Sentence/Sentencing: Offence against children of sexual nature – Punishment for – Held: Any act of sexual assault or sexual harassment to the children should be viewed very seriously and all such offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment on the children have to be dealt with in a stringent manner and no leniency should be shown to a person who has committed the offence under the POCSO Act – By awarding a suitable punishment commensurate with the act of sexual assault or sexual harassment, a message must be conveyed to the society at large that, if anybody commits any offence under the POCSO Act of sexual assault, sexual harassment or use of children for pornographic purposes they shall be punished suitably and no leniency shall be shown to them – Cases of sexual assault or sexual harassment on the children are instances of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of such debased sexual pleasure – Exploitation of children in such a manner is a crime against humanity and the society – Therefore, the children and more particularly the girl child deserve full protection and need greater care and protection whether in the urban or rural areas – No leniency can be shown to an accused commits the offences under the POCSO Act, 2012 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.Sentence/Sentencing: Accused held guilty for committing ‘aggravated penetrative sexual assault’ – Plea for leniency in sentencing – Held: Accused was aged approximately 65 years of age at the time of commission of offence – He was a neighbour of the victim girl – He took advantage of the absence of her parents, when her mother went to fetch water and her father had gone to work – He was found to have committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a girl child aged four years, which demonstrates the mental state or mindset of the accused – As a neighbour, in fact, it was the duty of the accused to protect the victim girl when alone rather than exploiting her innocence and vulnerability – He instead of showing fatherly love, affection and protection to the child against the evils of the society, rather made her the victim of lust – It is a case where trust has been betrayed and social values are impaired – Therefore, the accused as such does not deserve any sympathy and/or any leniency – At the relevant time, the minimum punishment provided for the offence under s.6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 was ten years RI and which may extend to imprisonment for life – Accused is aged 70-75 years of age and is suffering from Tuberculosis (TB) – Therefore, considering such mitigating circumstances, life sentence is converted to fifteen years RI – The fine imposed by the Trial Court confirmed by the High Court is maintained – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 162
Petitioner	Nawabuddin
Respondent	State Of Uttarakhand
SCR	[2022] 1 S.C.R. 1083
Judgement Date	2022-02-08
Case Number	144

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Please Log-in to view this content

State of U.p Vs. Sonu Kushwaha

Davinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Ravi S/o Ashok Ghumare Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Gangadhar Narayan Nayak @ Gangadhar Hiregutti Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.

Shatrughna Baban Meshram Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ganesan Vs. State Represented By Its Inspector of Police

Dr. Sr. Tessy Jose and Others Vs. State of Kerala

Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Attorney General for India Vs. Satish and Another

Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of U.p Vs. Sonu Kushwaha

Davinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Ravi S/o Ashok Ghumare Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Gangadhar Narayan Nayak @ Gangadhar Hiregutti Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.

Shatrughna Baban Meshram Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ganesan Vs. State Represented By Its Inspector of Police

Dr. Sr. Tessy Jose and Others Vs. State of Kerala

Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Attorney General for India Vs. Satish and Another

Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand