BALANCING VICTIM PROTECTION AND ACCUSED RIGHTS

AUTHOR – SHREYA KARDAM, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL NOIDA , UTTAR PRADESH

BEST CITATION – SHREYA KARDAM, BALANCING VICTIM PROTECTION AND ACCUSED RIGHTS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (5) OF 2025, PG. 212-219, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

Abstract

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, was enacted in India to provide a robust legal framework for the protection of children from sexual abuse and exploitation. This legislation has significantly redefined the landscape of child protection in the Indian criminal justice system by creating child-friendly procedures and imposing stringent penalties on perpetrators. However, while the POCSO Act aims to safeguard child victims, it also raises significant concerns about ensuring the constitutional rights of the accused, especially the right to a fair trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This study seeks to critically examine the impact of the POCSO Act on the balance between victim protection and the rights of the accused within the Indian legal framework.

The research focuses on the dual obligation of the justice system to both protect vulnerable child victims and uphold the fundamental principles of criminal law, particularly the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair, impartial, and timely trial. The POCSO Act introduces several special procedures, such as child-friendly courts, the presence of support persons, in-camera trials, and restrictions on bail and anticipatory bail, all of which are intended to shield child victims from secondary trauma during the legal process. However, these provisions often create tension with the rights of the accused, who may be subjected to pre-trial stigma, reverse burdens of proof, and constraints on bail that challenge established legal norms.

This dissertation explores whether the procedural innovations under the POCSO Act align with the constitutional commitment to justice, equality, and due process. It investigates whether the current legal provisions effectively balance the rights of both parties or if the scales have been unduly tipped in favor of victims at the cost of fundamental criminal jurisprudence. It further examines how Indian courts have interpreted and applied these provisions, and whether judicial discretion has been used to mitigate or exacerbate this imbalance.

In addition to doctrinal and jurisprudential analysis, this study also draws upon international human rights frameworks, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), to situate India’s legal developments within a global context. The research highlights the comparative approaches adopted by other jurisdictions in balancing victim protection and accused rights, and the lessons India can derive from such models.