Bhanei Prasad @ Raju vs State of Himachal Pradesh 2025 INSC 934 - POCSO Act - Restitution

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6 -The testimony of a child victim, if found credible and trustworthy, requires no corroboration. (Para 6)

POCSO Act - While upholding conviction of a man accused of sexually assaulting his minor 10 year old daughter, SC observed: Incestuous sexual violence committed by a parent is a distinct category of offence that tears through the foundational fabric of familial trust and must invite the severest condemnation in both language and sentence - 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. (Para 13) In offences involving sexual abuse, especially against children, the trauma suffered by the victim is lifelong. The scars are not merely physical but psychological, cutting across every fibre of trust, safety, and dignity. When the perpetrator is none other than the father, the natural guardian, the crime assumes a demonic character. (Para 8)

POCSO Act - justice must not be limited to conviction, it must, where the law so permits, include restitution [Context: SC directed that a sum of Rs.10,50,000 be paid to the victim as compensation as per the Scheme by the State of Himachal Pradesh in the peculiar facts of the case]