S. 22 POCSO Act| Child Can't Be Prosecuted For Perjury For False Allegations Of Rape: J&K High Court

Citing Section 22 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act, protecting children from punishment for false information Justice Rajesh Oswal observed,

“A perusal of the Section 22(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act would reveal that if a false complaint has been made or false information has been provided by a child, no punishment shall be imposed upon such child”.

The observations came while hearing an appeal whereby the appellant, Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir had challenged the order of the Principal Sessions Judge, Udhampur, which had refused to take action against the respondents under Section 340 Cr.P.C for perjury

In the instant case the respondent girl, who was a minor at the time of the alleged assault, had filed a complaint with the police in 2020, accusing a man of sexually assaulting her. During the investigation, the girl and her parents made statements to the police supporting the allegations. However, during the trial, the girl and her parents resiled from their earlier statements and claimed that the allegations were false.

Assailing the order the appellants argued that the girl and her parents should be prosecuted for perjury for making false statements. They contended that the girl's initial complaint and the statements made to the police constituted false information, and that the girl and her parents had deliberately misled the court.

On the other hand, the respondents, through their counsel Mr. Rajat Gupta, contended that their statements were not false, and therefore, the trial court's decision was justified.

Justice Oswal, in his judgment, highlighted that Section 22(2) of the POCSO Act explicitly protects children from prosecution for false complaints or information. The court emphasized that the minor prosecutrix, being 17 years old, falls under the protective ambit of this section and cannot be prosecuted for perjury.

“In the present case, the prosecutrix was admittedly 17 years of age, meaning thereby she was a minor child and because of this reason only the accused was prosecuted for commission of offence under Section 4 of POCSO Act. Once, the special Act prohibits the punishment of a child in respect of false information provided by a child, the child cannot be prosecuted for commission of offence of perjury”, the court recorded.

The court further asserted that to charge someone with perjury, it must be established that the false statement was made deliberately and consciously. In this case, the lack of unimpeachable evidence and the fact that the respondents were minors or non-witnesses contributed to the dismissal of the appeal.

In light of these considerations, the court dismissed the appeal.

Case Title: UT of J&K Vs X

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment