Court emphasizes need for specialized training and infrastructure for POCSO Courts; State urged to establish 13 permanent exclusive POCSO Courts and ensure compliance with statutory norms
In a significant judgment delivered on October 14, 2026, the Kerala High Court (Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M.) has ruled against the Government Order that allowed Special Public Prosecutors appointed for Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) cases to also conduct non-POCSO cases under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (JJ Act), 2015.
The Public Interest Litigation was initiated by the District Court Bar Association, Thodupuzha-Muttom, challenging the state government's directive which permitted Special Public Prosecutors for POCSO cases to handle other cases under the JJ Act. The High Court held that such a practice is untenable and contrary to the mandate of Section 32 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
The Court underscored the Supreme Court's directions in the Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl) No. 1 of 2019, dated 8th January 2020, which stressed the necessity of appointing Special Public Prosecutors exclusively for POCSO cases. Section 32(1) of the POCSO Act explicitly requires that "every State must by Notification appoint a Special Public Prosecutor for every Special Court for conducting cases only under the provisions of the Act." This exclusivity ensures that prosecutors develop the specialized expertise needed to handle sensitive cases involving child victims of sexual offences with the requisite care, sensitivity, and understanding of child psychology and trauma.
The Court highlighted the unique challenges faced by Special Public Prosecutors in POCSO cases, including the need to empathize with child victims and witnesses, and to manage the psychological and emotional complexities involved. It emphasized that burdening these prosecutors with non-POCSO cases would dilute their focus and reduce the effectiveness of prosecution in such sensitive matters.
Consequently, the Kerala High Court directed the State Government to appoint exclusive Special Public Prosecutors for POCSO cases within six weeks. Furthermore, the Court instructed the State to consider the establishment of 13 permanent exclusive POCSO Special Courts - one in each district except Ernakulam - and to communicate its decision to the High Court Administration within four weeks.
In addition to personnel appointments, the Court addressed infrastructural concerns. It directed the Registrar (District Judiciary) to ensure all POCSO Courts conform strictly to statutory requirements under the POCSO Act and related guidelines under the JJ Act. Any deficiencies in infrastructure are to be rectified promptly with financial and other assistance from the State Government.
This judgment reinforces the importance of a child-centric approach in judicial proceedings involving sexual offences against children. The Kerala High Court has thus reaffirmed the principle that legal mechanisms addressing such grave offences must be specialized, sensitive, and supported by adequate infrastructure and trained personnel.
Bottom Line:
POCSO Act - Special Public Prosecutors appointed for POCSO cases must conduct only POCSO cases and cannot be permitted to conduct non-POCSO cases under the Juvenile Justice Act - State directed to appoint exclusive Special Public Prosecutors for POCSO cases and to ensure establishment and infrastructure compliance of exclusive POCSO Courts.
Statutory provision(s):
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 32, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 Section 2(20)
