The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a couple who had taken custody of a six-year-old girl and subjected her to relentless cruelty and sexual assault, while strongly criticizing the investigating agency for failing to probe the possibility of child trafficking in the case.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while dismissing the appeal filed by the adoptive parents, noted glaring lapses in the investigation. The Court highlighted that the biological parents of the victim were never traced, nor was any inquiry made into how the child came to live with the accused in the first place.
“Such an omission leaves unanswered the grave question of whether the child had been trafficked or illegally transferred into the custody of the appellants. No inquiry was made into the aspect of adoption or trafficking of the minor child,” Justice Sharma remarked.
The Court recorded that the minor girl, badly tortured, traumatized, and brutally assaulted, continued to remain with her so-called adoptive parents. Shockingly, despite her condition and the seriousness of the allegations, neither the Delhi Police nor the Trial Court deemed it necessary to explore the background of how she came into their custody.
Convictions Upheld Under JJ Act, IPC, and POCSO
Upholding the trial court’s findings, the High Court confirmed the couple’s conviction under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, read with Section 34 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The adoptive father’s conviction under Section 376 IPC (rape) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was also sustained.
The Court underscored that the medical evidence corroborated the victim’s account of sustained cruelty. Doctors had noted multiple injuries, including burn marks, which aligned with her statements of physical and sexual assault.
Justice Sharma emphasized that cases of this nature demand not only a probe into cruelty and sexual assault but also a holistic investigation into the larger context of trafficking, abduction, or illegal custody of vulnerable children.
The judgment observed:
“The facts of the present case strongly suggest that the victim was not only subjected to inhuman torture but was also a vulnerable child who may have been possibly exploited after being trafficked. Unfortunately, this crucial dimension was altogether overlooked at the stage of investigation as well as during the consideration of charge by the learned Trial Court.”
The Court concluded that the failure to investigate the trafficking angle was a serious investigative lapse. It warned that unless such omissions are rectified, the broader menace of child trafficking and exploitation will remain unchecked.
By affirming the convictions, the Delhi High Court not only delivered justice to the victim but also flagged a systemic weakness in investigations relating to child abuse cases—calling for greater vigilance against trafficking and unlawful custody masked as adoption.
