The Karnataka High Court has upheld POCSO proceedings against an IISc professor accused of child sexual assault. Learn about the court’s judgment, the role of child testimony, and its impact on speedy justice.

POCSO FIR Against IISc Professor to Proceed Amidst Allegations

On June 12, the Karnataka High Court rejected a plea to quash a 2018 FIR filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against an assistant professor at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru. He was accused of sexually inappropriate behavior involving a 10-year-old girl during a birthday party game referred to as a ‘ghost house.’

Defense Arguments: No Medical Evidence and Inconsistent Testimony

The defense claimed procedural lapses, lack of medical examination, and delays in filing the report. They also questioned the consistency of the child’s statements, alleging external influence. However, the prosecution countered these claims by presenting eight corroborating witness testimonies recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC, maintaining that the case merited a full trial.

Justice Nagaprasanna’s Verdict: Testimony of One Child Can Be Sufficient

Presiding Judge Justice M. Nagaprasanna ruled that under Sections 7 (sexual assault) and 8 (aggravated sexual assault) of the POCSO Act, a single credible testimony is adequate for the matter to proceed to trial. He stressed that evaluating the credibility of such testimony is the trial court’s responsibility, not a pre-trial prerogative.

Fast-Track Trial Ordered for POCSO Case

Noting the extended legal delay, the bench directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings and aim for a conclusion within three months. The court highlighted the importance of timely justice in child sexual abuse cases, in line with the urgent nature of such offenses.

Conclusion: Reinforcing Child Protection and Legal Accountability

This ruling from the Karnataka High Court reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to upholding child rights and ensuring legal accountability. By prioritizing consistent child testimony and mandating fast-track trials, the court strikes a balance between due process and the pressing need for justice in POCSO cases.