Victim Will Be Reminded Of The Incident She Is Trying Hard To Forget, Rajasthan HC Holds POCSO Convict Can't Serve Parole In Victim's Village

While directing a POCSO convict not to enter the village where the victim resides for the duration of parole granted, Rajasthan High Court opined that the absence of such a safeguard will adversely affect the mental well-being of the survivor/victim.

The Division Bench comprising Justices Dinesh Mehta and Rajendra Prakash Soni observed that if the victim were to face the convict during parole, he/she would be forced to revisit the trauma caused by the convict. The court also added that such a scenario would remind the victim of the incident she is trying hard to forget.

“The Court is mindful of the legislative intent of the POCSO Act which provides that the contact between the accused and the victim should be prevented in order to minimise the trauma experienced by the child…”, the bench sitting at Jodhpur noted in the order.

The division bench also emphasised the importance of striking a balance between the sentiments/safety of the victim and the statutory rights of the accused. Therefore, the court deemed it fit to allow the accused/convict to spend his parole duration at a place far away from the residence of the victim.

While quashing the order of the District Parole Advisory Committee, Deedwana-Kuchaman which rejected the second parole application, the court instructed the convict to spend his time of parole in Naryanpura village, far enough from the victim's residence.

“…It is ordered that the convict petitioner Moti Ram S/o Deva Ram shall be released on second parole of thirty days upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of Superintendent Central, Jail, Ajmer on the usual terms and conditions”, the court set the parole conditions while granting liberty to the Jail Superintendent for imposing additional conditions to ensure return of the convict to the custody.

The convict should also report before Naryanpura Police Station every third day of the parole duration.

The petitioner, Moti Ram, is currently serving a life sentence after he was convicted under Section 376(2)(f) IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act for sexually assaulting a seven-year-old minor. He was granted a 20-day parole duration in February 2020. His current application for second parole under Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 was rejected by the Parole Advisory Committee on 10.10.2023. The current writ petition was filed against such rejection intimated to the wife of the convict by the Deedwana-Kuchaman District Magistrate.

The counsel for the state had argued that the petitioner's residence is adjacent to that of the victim and his release on parole won't be in the best interests of the victim. However, the petitioner's counsel took the stance that he will be residing at his in-laws place in Narayanpura for the parole duration.

Counsel For Petitioner: Advocate Kalu Ram Bhati

Counsel For Respondents: Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG assisted by Rajat Chhaparwal

Case Title: Moti Ram V. State of Rajasthan, Home Department & Ors

Case No: D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 199/2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 38

Click Here To Read/ Download Order