Delhi High Court Requests Clerk To Report On Sexual Harassment Trials Without The Victim Speaking About It

0
8

Counsel has stated that more than 80 cases have been heard in this way by the courts of first instance.

The Delhi High Court on Friday ordered the Registrar General to file an urgent report on the number of sexual offenses cases processed by first instance courts where bail applications were heard without hearing the complainant .

Judge Prathiba M Singh, who conducted the hearing by videoconference, said that a detailed report would be filed after collecting data from the judges of the Delhi district.

The High Court said that victims of sexual offenses have a say in the hearing of the accused’s bail pleas and ordered a redistribution of practice instructions on the matter.

The High Court was informed that the courts of first instance were infringing the instructions previously issued by the High Court by adopting bail orders without complying with the mandatory requirement to give notice to the complainant or the authorized person for bail of accused sex offenders.

<< It is considered appropriate that an emergency report be requested by the Registrar General, concerning the number of these cases which have been dealt with by the criminal courts / POCSO without notice to the applicant and the number of cases in which the applicant was not present or not heard prior to the processing of bail applications.

“A detailed report must be lodged with this court after collecting the data from the various district judges in all Delhi district courts. The practical instructions must be fully observed, as they aim to guarantee respect for the rights of the complainants / victims”. are adequately protected, “said the judge.

The High Court heard a plea from the mother of a minor rape victim challenging the provisional release granted to the accused by a trial court without giving them a hearing or notice.

Lawyer Tara Narula, representing the victim, said that the trial court’s interim release order on May 5 had been routinely adopted and was not only against the law, but also that she also suffered from procedural flaws on the part of the court.

She stated that the order was made without the FIR complainant being notified and denied the opportunity to be heard.

Counsel has stated that more than 80 cases have been heard in this way by the courts of first instance.

The district court was informed by the lawyer for the accused that his provisional bail should not be canceled because his wife was not well.

He said his wife’s medical report was due within a week and listed the case for June 4.

Counsel for the victim argued that as of April 21, 2018, the law had amended the law under which the presence of the informer or any authorized person would be mandatory at the time of the hearing of the request for bail. the person charged with sexual offenses.

Earlier, the High Court had declared: “Since it is argued by the applicant’s lawyer that many courts do not follow the above instructions, let the Registrar General of this Court distribute the practical instructions again” from 24 September 2019 and High Court orders of November 25, 2019 and January 27 of this year to all district and session judges in Delhi.

District and sitting judges will bring directions to the attention of the criminal courts dealing with sexual offenses under the ICC and the Child Protection from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO) under their respective jurisdictions, said the High Court.

The High Court, in its ordinances of last year, ordered the dissemination of practice directives on this subject among district judges and, later, the directives were extended to cases brought under the POCSO law.

Narula argued that a directive had been issued to district judges, the National Commission for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (NCPCR) and the State Commission for the Protection of the Rights of the Child ( SCPCR) in order to comply strictly.

The high court was informed by the lawyer that the victim and his family live near the accused and to release him on bail is a threat to their lives.

The High Court said that police protection for the victim would continue.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here