Incestuous sexual violence by a parent tears through the foundational fabric of familial trust and must invite the severest condemnation in both language and sentence, the Supreme Court held on Wednesday, dismissing a petition filed by a man convicted of repeatedly raping his minor daughter
“The home, which should be a sanctuary, cannot be permitted to become a site of unspeakable trauma, and the courts must send a clear signal that such offences will be met with an equally unsparing judicial response,” said a bench of justices Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta.
To entertain a plea for leniency in a case of this nature, the court stressed, would not merely be misplaced, but constitute a betrayal of the court’s own constitutional duty to protect the vulnerable.
“When a child is forced to suffer at the hands of her own father, the law must speak in a voice that is resolute and uncompromising. There can be no mitigation in sentencing for crimes that subvert the very notion of family as a space of security,” said the bench, affirming the life sentence for the convict.
Rejecting outright, the plea to consider his bail in the 2013 crime, the court added that any leniency in such cases would amount to “a judicial insult to the sanctity of womanhood” and “a betrayal of the constitutional promise made to every child of this country.”
{{/usCountry}}Rejecting outright, the plea to consider his bail in the 2013 crime, the court added that any leniency in such cases would amount to “a judicial insult to the sanctity of womanhood” and “a betrayal of the constitutional promise made to every child of this country.”
{{/usCountry}}“When a father who is expected to be a shield, a guardian, a moral compass, becomes the source of the most severe violation of a child’s bodily integrity and dignity, the betrayal is not only personal but institutional. The law does not, and cannot, condone such acts under the guise of rehabilitation or reform,” it said.
Upholding the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s July 2024 judgment that affirmed the man’s life sentence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the court said the case reflected a horrifying abuse of trust, where the father became the “source of the most severe violation of a child’s bodily integrity and dignity.”
The court noted that the victim was around 10 years old when the assaults began, which were not isolated but sustained violations inside the home – “a place where every child expects protection.”
Referring to the father’s repeated acts of aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the bench said the crime “assumes a demonic character” when committed by a parent, and warrants the “severest condemnation in both language and sentence.”
“No daughter, however aggrieved, would fabricate charges of this magnitude against her own father merely to escape household discipline,” observed the bench, rejecting the convict’s claim that he was falsely implicated due to strained domestic relationships.
It acknowledged that “incestuous sexual violence constitutes a distinct category of offence that tears through the foundational fabric of familial trust”, holding that such offences deserve nothing but the severest condemnation and deterrent punishment.
“To pardon such depravity under any guise would be a travesty of justice and a betrayal of the child protection mandate embedded in our constitutional and statutory framework,” maintained the bench, underlining the court’s zero-tolerance approach.
Reiterating that justice must not be limited to conviction, the court also emphasised the importance of restitution and rehabilitation, especially for child survivors. Invoking Article 142 of the Constitution, the bench directed the state of Himachal Pradesh to pay a compensation of ₹10.5 lakh to the now-major survivor, exceeding the maximum prescribed under the NALSA Compensation Scheme by 50% due to the gravity of the offence and age of the victim.
Of this amount, ₹7 lakh is to be fixed in a nationalised bank for five years in the survivor’s name, with quarterly interest accessible to her. The remaining ₹3.5 lakh is to be transferred directly to her account. The process will be monitored by the Himachal Pradesh State Legal Services Authority.
“In awarding this compensation, we reaffirm the constitutional commitment to protect the rights and dignity of child survivors, and to ensure that the justice delivered is substantive, compassionate and complete,” held the court.