Lack of injury no ground to deny compensation in penetrative assault cases under POCSO: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court recently held that compensation to a child, who is a victim of penetrative sexual assault, cannot be denied on the ground that the medical record does not indicate injury to the private parts.

The Division Bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Manjive Shukla was dealing with the case of a victim under Section 4 (penetrative sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act).

The victim had been denied the compensation promised under 'Uttar Pradesh Rani Lakshmi Bai Mahila Samman Kosh Rules, 2015’ on the ground that there was no evidence of "penetrating injury”.

The Court ruled that the presence or absence of such injury is immaterial.

“Under the Scheme, compensation is to be paid to the victim of penetrative sexual assault not because the victim has sustained injuries during the penetrative sexual assault, but due to the very fact of having suffered the penetrative sexual assault. Therefore, till such time, the offence is covered within the definition of penetrative sexual assault as per Section 3 of the POSCO Act, it is immaterial whether there is any injury or not and only because there is no injury that cannot be a ground to refuse compensation to such victims,” the Court said.

The scheme in question provides that a victim of penetrative sexual assault will receive an aggregate compensation of ₹1 lakh – ₹3 lakh within 15 days of filing of the FIR and the balance within a month of filing of the charge sheet. 

A State counsel defended a district steering committee's decision to keep the victim's claim in abeyance, arguing that injury is a prerequisite for grant of compensation under the scheme.

However, the Court, while referring to the vast definition of penetrative sexual assault under Section 3 of POCSO Act, said,

“The very actions as provided in Section 3(a), 3(b), 3(c) and 3(d) would amount to penetrative sexual assault and it is clear that for the penetrative sexual assault to be proven, it is not necessary that there be an injury that conclusively proves the said penetrative sexual assault.”

It also noted that the Supreme Court in a number of cases has held that any of the actions as prescribed under Section 3 of the POSCO Act would lead to a penetrative sexual assault and no further evidence is required for the punishment as prescribed under Section 4 of the POSCO Act.

“The Supreme Court in Dalip Kumar @ Dalli v. State Of Uttaranchal (Criminal Appeal No. 1005 of 2013) decided on January 16, 2025 has observed that penetrative sexual assault need not always lead to physical injury,” it added.

Thus, the High Court ruled that the prerequisites in the scheme do not in any manner require that the injury report must definitely indicate a penetrative sexual assault injury.

“Our reading of the said provision of the Scheme is that for granting benefit to the victim, the three documents, that is, the FIR, the injury report and the charge sheet should be present,” it added.

The Court further said that as long as the FIR and the charge indicate the offence under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, no further investigation is required to be carried out by the steering committee.

The steering committee cannot conduct a trial and come to a contrary finding that since there is no injury indicated in the injury report, the compensation is not payable, it emphasized.

The bench observed that the scheme is a beneficial legislation that aims to ameliorate the trauma and the pain that is suffered by the victims and has to be read as a beneficial legislation in a liberal manner.

Considering the findings, the Court directed that a compensation of ₹3 lakh be paid to the victim immediately. 

Advocate Anjum Ara represented the victim.

Advocate Shailesh Chandra Tiwari appeared for the State.

[Read Judgment]