"Our Job Is Akin To That Of A Mother": Madras High Court Decries Bar Apathy, Urges Judicial Training In POCSO Child Victim Examinations
The Bench said that examining child victims requires maternal empathy, criticized lawyers for casually seeking witness recalls and directing judicial academies to train judges on child psychology.
The Madras High Court has issued a stern call for empathy and institutional reform in handling child witnesses under the POCSO Act, observing that examining young victims is akin to a mother gently feeding an infant without pressure or pain. Setting aside a trial court order that permitted the prosecution to recall a 10-year-old sexual assault victim who was examined seven years after the incident, the Court expressed deep concern over the "apathy" shown by the Bar in casually filing recall petitions. Highlighting that judges and lawyers still have "a long way to go in understanding victim children," the Bench mandated specialized training for judicial officers through judicial academies to master the art of empathizing with child witnesses.
Refusing to allow the young girl to be subjected to secondary victimization, the Court reiterated that Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act explicitly bars repeatedly summoning child witnesses. The Bench held that the "best interest of the child" standard must prevail over procedural delays and defense tactics, directing trial courts to ensure same-day cross-examinations and abstain from recalling child victims.
A Single Judge Bench comprising Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy observed, "The law rests on the ‘good sense and discretion of the judge’ with reference to the competency of these witnesses, and the POCSO Act places heavy reliance on the Presiding Officer in questioning and eliciting the relevant information from the child... Thus, it can be seen that we have a long way to go in understanding the victim children, their inner voice, and the art of empathising with them. Our job is akin to that of a mother, who feeds the infant by making it focus on the moon. Like the gentle hand that makes the baby ultimately see the moon without feeling any pressure or pain, the entire exercise has to be carried on with a great deal of empathy and care. A vast majority of the Bar refuse to even acknowledge/understand the importance of healing and the child's right to move on after deposing...Unless the Bar comes out of this apathy shown towards children involved, the dilemma between subjecting children to secondary victimisation and the valuable right of defence of the accused would continue. But the time has come to focus on the paramount – that is the best interests of the child".
Advocate R. Muthukumar appeared for the petitioner and M. Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate appeared for the respondent.
The brief facts of the case involve an incident from August 2018, when a three-year-old LKG student experienced acute pain in her private parts upon returning from school. She disclosed to her mother that the school bus driver had pinched her in the bathroom. A medical examination confirmed signs of sexual assault, and an FIR was registered under Section 376 IPC and Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 POCSO Act by the Redhills All Women Police Station.
An initial attempt to record the child's statement under Section 164 CrPC was abandoned as she was continuously crying. Following investigation, a charge sheet was filed in 2020, but owing to pandemic delays, the victim child, now 10 years old, was examined as PW2 before the Special Court for POCSO Act, Tiruvallur, only on August 11, 2025.
The trial court recorded the child’s deposition in full within a screened glass enclosure in the presence of the prosecutor and defense counsel. The trial judge noted that the child deposed with a grim face. Subsequently, the defense reported "No Cross". The prosecution then sought to recall PW2 on the ground that she was in fear during her chief examination. On September 29, 2025, the Special Court allowed the recall application. Aggrieved, the accused driver filed a Criminal Original Petition under Section 528 BNSS before the High Court to set aside the trial court's order.
The Court highlighted the systemic failure in delaying the trial for seven years, forcing a 10-year-old to recall events from when she was three. Citing guidelines from NIMHANS and the Karnataka Judicial Academy on child witness testimony, the Bench noted that preschoolers lack long-term memory specificity and that judges must build rapport rather than expect coherent narrative timelines years later.
The Court set aside the trial court's order allowing the recall of PW2, and clarified that the prosecution remains free to proceed with the trial and establish its case using the child's existing testimony on record alongside other available evidence, including the mother's deposition.
“The Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy, which has already been conducting workshops in this regard, shall further endeavour to supply copies of this manual and related materials, preferably a Tamil version as well, to every Special Court and to the Learned Magistrates. The subject, especially the practical art of dealing with child witnesses, can also be imparted at the Academy. Many of our judicial officers who have practical experience of such incidents have to share their experiences. Practical exercises and discussions on interviewing/examining child victims shall be part of the curriculum. The services of field experts shall be utilised”, the Bench said.
Cause Title: Paulpandiyan v. State (CRL OP No. 28664 of 2025 & Crl.M.P.No.19361 of 2025).
Appearances:
Petitioner: R. Muthukumar, Advocate.
Respondent: M. Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate.