POCSO In-Camera Deposition Required For Girl Who Was 17 Years 11 Months At Alleged Offence, Though She Turned 18 Before Trial: Gujarat HC

In brief

The question

1. Whether the POCSO Act’s provisions governing the recording of a victim’s deposition applied when the prosecutrix had been a minor at the time of the alleged offence but had attained majority by the commencement of trial.

The court held

The High Court allowed the petition to the extent of setting aside the impugned order and directing the Exclusive POCSO Court, Ahmedabad (Rural), to record the prosecutrix’s deposition in camera in accordance with Sections 33(2), 36 and 37 of the POCSO Act.

It also directed

The petition was disposed of and the Rule made absolute to that extent.

01Facts

The petitioner was facing trial in POCSO Case No. 35 of 2025 for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act.

The prosecutrix was 17 years and 11 months old at the time of the alleged offence, but had attained majority by the time the trial commenced.

p. 3

The petitioner’s application seeking in-camera recording of her deposition under Sections 36 and 37 of the POCSO Act was rejected by the Exclusive POCSO Court on 8 August 2026.

pp. 2–3

The petitioner challenged that order before the High Court.

pp. 2–3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the POCSO Act’s provisions governing the recording of a victim’s deposition applied when the prosecutrix had been a minor at the time of the alleged offence but had attained majority by the commencement of trial.

p. 3

ii.2. Whether the trial court’s refusal to record the prosecutrix’s deposition in camera should be set aside.

pp. 2–3

03Law Applied

The Court applied Sections 33(2), 36 and 37 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, concerning the procedure for recording evidence and protective measures in proceedings involving a child.

p. 3

It held that the prosecutrix’s age at the time of the alleged offence governed the application of those provisions; her attaining majority by the time of trial did not displace their application.

p. 3

Although the petition also sought relief by reference to Section 308 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Court’s stated reasoning and direction relied on the POCSO Act.

pp. 1–2, 3

Provisions in the judgment · 13 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 308

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137 Section 64 Section 77

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 9 provisions

Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 33 Section 36 Section 37

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the alleged offence occurred when the prosecutrix was 17 years and 11 months old and that the case had been registered under the POCSO Act.

p. 3

It concluded that the POCSO provisions governing the recording of her evidence therefore applied, notwithstanding her later attainment of majority.

p. 3

On that basis, it found that the trial court’s refusal to order in-camera recording could not stand and directed compliance with Sections 33(2), 36 and 37.

p. 3