Introduction:

In a significant development, the Delhi High Court, exercising its suo moto revisional jurisdiction, intervened in a public interest litigation challenging the discharge of two individuals accused of circulating and storing child pornography material. The court’s decision aimed to rectify manifest legal flaws and uphold justice for victims of child sexual abuse.

Arguments:

The petition, filed by Tulir Charitable Trust, contested a trial court’s order discharging the accused under Section 15(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The trial court’s rationale, based on the absence of criteria to determine the age of children depicted in pornographic material, was challenged by the petitioner. While seeking guidelines for handling cases involving Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), the court emphasized the importance of considering the definition of ‘child pornography’ under the POCSO Act.

Court’s Judgement:

The Delhi High Court underscored the relevance of the definition of ‘child pornography’ in determining the applicability of Section 15 of the POCSO Act. It clarified that a prima facie inference of a child’s involvement suffices to classify material as child pornography. The court criticized the trial court for overlooking this definition and failing to apply the principle of framing charges based on sufficient material evidence. Additionally, it highlighted the impracticality of applying certain procedural steps when victims are unidentifiable, thereby emphasizing the need for pragmatic legal interpretation.