The Supreme Court Monday expressed shock over the conduct of Himachal Pradesh in litigating a "sensitive matter" relating to allegations of sexual assault by a man on his minor daughter and imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the state for the delay in filling the plea before it. The apex court noted the 636-day lag in filing of the petition by the state against the December 2018 judgement of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which acquitted the accused, and said there was not even a semblance of explanation for the delay.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy, which said it would not dismiss the petition on limitation due to seriousness of the issue involved in it, condoned the delay subject to cost of Rs 25,000 to be deposited with the Supreme Court group C' (non-clerical) employees welfare association within four weeks. But that is no excuse why the state should not be made accountable of such inordinate delay and the persons responsible for the same, the bench said.
On our query as to what is the reason, counsel seeks to contend it is because of COVID. The order was passed on December 5, 2018 and thus, we asked the counsel as to which year was the world affected by COVID, 2019 or 2020, to which counsel's answer initially was 2019, possibly to cover the delay but realizing that it was 2020, he states that the papers were not received by him, the bench noted in its order. The top court directed the state to hold inquiry, fix responsibility and recover the amount from the officers concerned for the delay and said the certificate of recovery should also be filed before it.
To say the least, we are shocked at the conduct of the petitioner-state and the manner of conducting the litigation in such a sensitive matter. There is not even a semblance of explanation for delay, the bench said. The bench issued notice and sought response from the man, who was acquitted in the case, on the petition filed by the state challenging the high court verdict. The high court had delivered the verdict on an appeal filed by the man against the trial court August 2017 order convicting him for the alleged offences punishable under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. He was sentenced to 10 years jail by the trial court. An FIR was lodged in July 2016 alleging that the accused had physically and sexually assaulted his minor daughter after the death of his wife. The accused was arrested after the FIR was lodged.
The high court had allowed the appeal filed by the man against the trial court order saying the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
Read all the Latest News, Breaking News and Assembly Elections Live Updates here.
Comments
0 comment