The Supreme Court on Tuesday (August 20, 2024) set aside the decision of the Calcutta High Court in a case and also objected to the remarks made by the judges in the verdict. While giving the verdict to acquit an accused of sexual harassment, the Calcutta High Court had also advised teenagers to control their sexual desires. The Supreme Court termed these remarks objectionable and said that judges should give verdicts, not preach.
Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan said that the bench has issued several guidelines to the authorities to deal with the cases registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act. Justice Abhay S Oka, who delivered the verdict on behalf of the bench, said that guidelines have also been issued regarding how the courts should write the judgment.
The Supreme Court said, ‘Undoubtedly, the courts can comment on the parties, but it should be limited. The decision should not include the personal opinion of the judges.’ The bench said that judges should give decisions, not sermons. The court said, ‘There should not be unnecessary things in the judgment. The language of the judgment should be simple. The court’s decisions should not be thesis or literature, but this decision included the personal opinion of the judges for the youth.’
The Supreme Court had strongly criticized the decision of the Calcutta High Court on December 8 last year. Some of the comments made in the decision were termed as extremely objectionable and completely inappropriate. The Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognizance of some comments made by the High Court bench and initiated it as a writ petition. The court had said that judges are not expected to preach while writing the decision.
The West Bengal government had also challenged this controversial decision of the High Court dated 18 October 2023. The High Court had said in its decision, ‘Teenagers should control their sexual desires because when they get into the trap of having barely two minutes of sexual pleasure, then they become bad in the eyes of the society.’ The High Court had made this remark while hearing the petition of a person who was sentenced to 20 years in a sexual harassment case. The court had acquitted this person.
While hearing the case on January 4, the Supreme Court had said that some paragraphs in the High Court’s decision were objectionable and it was absolutely wrong to write such a decision. In its order passed on December 8 last year, the Supreme Court referred to some comments of the High Court and said, ‘Prima facie, the said comments are completely in violation of the rights guaranteed to juveniles under Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution.’
The Supreme Court had said that the issue before the High Court was related to the validity of the order and judgment dated September 19/20, 2022, by which a person was convicted under Sections 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (kidnapping, abducting a woman to compel her for marriage) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) besides Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
The High Court, while acquitting the accused, had said in its judgment that this was a case of consensual sexual intercourse between two people, without any tendency of exploitation, although consent is unimportant considering the age of the victim.
The High Court had said, ‘It is the duty/responsibility of every adolescent girl to protect the right to the integrity of her body; protect her dignity and self-respect; strive for her overall development by overcoming gender barriers; protect her body autonomy and her right to privacy; control her sexual desires, because when she falls into the trap of getting barely two minutes of sexual pleasure, then she becomes bad in the eyes of the society.’
