Child's sexual assault complaint must be treated as credible, says Supreme Court

Published 9 July 2026 · general

The Supreme Court has held that information given by a minor victim about sexual assault will be treated as credible, and the person receiving it

The Supreme Court has held that information given by a minor victim about sexual assault will be treated as credible, and the person receiving it will be legally bound to report it to the authorities, including the police, under the Pocso Act. A bench of Justices Manoj Misra and KV Viswanathan said the phrase "has knowledge that such an offence has been committed" is not confined to direct knowledge, but also covers awareness based on information received directly from the child victim. Read Full Story The ruling came in a case linked to a school in Arunachal Pradesh, where an eight-year-old girl had reported sexual assault by a senior boy to her teachers, elder sister and classmates. Setting aside orders of the Gauhati High Court and the trial court, the top court said they had erred in discharging the teachers and headmistress from charges linked to failure to report the incident and related offences. The bench said, "Therefore, for the purposes of this Act, when a child victim reports to a person that he or she has been subjected to an offence, or is likely to be subjected to an offence, punishable under the Act, it could safely be concluded that the person to whom such information is provided by the child victim has knowledge that such an offence has been committed or is likely to be committed." It added that the word "knowledge" is not defined in the Pocso Act, other Codes or Acts, or even the General Clauses Act, 1897, and so it must be understood in a way that serves the purpose of the law.

The court also said there could be situations where a child reports an incident without fully understanding the nature of the act. "In such cases, and also where the information provided by the child is either not clear or confusing, a brief questioning of the child may be justified to derive a lucid picture of the nature of the information which the child wishes to convey. However, such questioning should not be with a view to rubbish the complaint made by the child, rather it must be to understand the true and correct nature of the complaint," it said. The court further said the High Court and the trial court were wrong in holding that the absence of visible signs of sexual assault meant there was no reason to believe an offence had been committed. At the same time, the bench clarified that not everyone in the institution could be prosecuted. "However, not all teachers or office bearers of the institution need to be prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 21 of the Act.