Rajasthan High Court Clarifies Victim's Right to Be Informed in POCSO Cases

Court rules that victims must be informed of proceedings without being made parties, ensuring their right to be heard.

In a landmark decision dated October 14, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court, under the stewardship of Justice Sandeep Shah, addressed the procedural aspects under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, regarding the rights of victims in bail proceedings. The court was adjudicating on a bail application filed by Sandeep Singh alias Sonu, whose previous bail application was rejected by the Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) in Hanumangarh.

The crux of the judgment was the clarification that while victims or their guardians are not required to be impleaded as parties in bail applications under the POCSO Act, they must be informed of such proceedings. This ensures that they have the opportunity to be heard, aligning with their substantive rights under the Act.

Justice Shah emphasized the legislative intent behind the POCSO Act and the associated rules, which aim to safeguard the interests of children and maintain their anonymity. The judgment meticulously outlined the procedural obligations of the prosecution and the investigating authorities to inform the victim’s family or guardian about any court proceedings, including bail applications, while protecting their identity.

The court issued comprehensive guidelines for the implementation of these provisions, directing that upon the filing of a bail application, the public prosecutor must notify the investigating officer, who in turn should inform the victim's guardians. Furthermore, legal aid must be ensured for the victim’s family if they cannot afford counsel, reinforcing the victim's participatory rights in the judicial process.

The judgment also referenced various High Court and Supreme Court precedents, which underscore the evolving jurisprudence around victim rights in India, emphasizing that victims have an independent right to be heard at every stage of the judicial process.

This decision is seen as a significant step in reinforcing the procedural rights of victims under the POCSO Act, ensuring that their voices are heard without compromising their privacy, thus upholding the principles of justice and fairness.

Bottom Line:

In cases under the POCSO Act, 2012, there is no requirement to implead the victim, parents, or guardian as a party to the proceedings; however, they must be informed about the filing of applications including bail applications and other court proceedings - Victims or their representatives have a right to be heard during all proceedings.

Statutory provision(s): Sections 39, 40, 23, 33, 37 of the POCSO Act, 2012; Section 439(1A) of CrPC; Sections 72, 73 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Rule 4 of POCSO Rules, 2020; Section 228A of CrPC.

Sandeep Singh Alias Sonu v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2796494