On Friday, the Supreme Court decided against jailing a man convicted of rape under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, taking into account that the victim—now his wife and the mother of his child—had endured greater suffering from the prolonged legal process than from the original act itself.

A bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan invoked the rarely used Article 142 of the Constitution, which allows the court to deliver "complete justice." While the man’s conviction was upheld, his sentence was suspended in a move the bench stressed should not serve as precedent. “True justice, in this exceptional situation, lies in not imposing imprisonment,” the court said, acknowledging the ruling as a reflection of systemic and societal failures.

The decision stems from a suo motu case launched in December 2023 in response to troubling comments made by the Calcutta High Court, which had acquitted the 25-year-old man and controversially advised adolescent girls to restrain their sexual impulses. The Supreme Court had previously overturned the acquittal and criticized those comments as inappropriate and flawed.

To better understand the complex dynamics of the case, the court had set up a panel comprising mental health professionals, social workers, and legal experts, and also appointed an amicus curiae. Their findings confirmed that although the man’s actions legally amounted to statutory rape—since minors cannot legally consent—the relationship had been consensual in nature and the victim herself did not view it as exploitative. The panel further reported that her trauma had deepened after her husband's 2021 arrest and his two-year incarceration.

The court noted that the young woman had become emotionally dependent on the man and deeply attached to their family unit. "Imprisoning the accused now would cause her the greatest harm," the bench observed, adding that she had been let down by society, the justice system, and even her own family. "Now she stands alone, desperately fighting to protect her husband," the court said.

Acknowledging the victim’s ongoing challenges, the West Bengal government informed the court of plans to support her and the child financially, including housing assistance and educational support. The court instructed the state to assume the role of a “true guardian” by ensuring long-term care, including nutritional and educational needs up to the college level.

On a broader note, the Supreme Court directed all states and Union Territories to assess the implementation of the POCSO and Juvenile Justice Acts and report their findings to the Union Ministry of Women and Child Development. It also backed initiatives for adolescent support systems, improved sex education, and enhanced data collection.

“The circumstances of this case are revealing,” the court concluded, describing it as a stark reminder of gaps in the justice system. It emphasized the importance of ensuring that victims are equipped to make informed decisions—something the court said was denied to the victim in this case.