M. Prosecutrix v. State (NCT of Delhi)
(2023) 2 HCC (Del) 584
In the High Court of Delhi
Transfer Petition (Crl.) 6/2023 and Crl. M.A. 1007/2023
Before Justice Anish Dayal
Decided on April 05, 2023

Relevancy of the Case: Petition seeking transfer of a case involving rape allegations and non-consensual sharing of private photos on the internet to a POCSO court presided over by a lady judge

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66E, 67A)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 376, 354A, 387)
• The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 26(a)(iii), 407)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The accused posted private photos of the petitioner on a porn site without her permission. The matter is listed for arguments and further proceedings.
• The petitioner wants a female judge instead of a male. She states that she feels uncomfortable appearing before the court.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel argued that the court could consider transferring the present case to a POCSO court presided over by a lady judge. Per the judgment of the Supreme Court in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, POCSO courts can also be used to try cases against women.

Opinion of the Bench

• Transferring this case to a POCSO court will set a bad precedent. It will open floodgates of similar cases wanting to be tried in the POCSO courts.
• Moreover, the petitioner’s discomfort cannot be the sole ground for transferring a case. Judges, regardless of gender, are expected to handle such cases sensitively.

Final Decision

• The court disposed of the transfer petition.