The Supreme Court on Friday allowed a person convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) to continue living with the victim, now his wife, instead of serving time.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka, who retired on Friday and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan invoked the Article 142 of the Constitution – which grants the Supreme Court power to pass any order necessary to ensure complete justice in a case pending before it – and decided not to sentence the convict.

“The facts of this case are an eye-opener for everyone. It highlights to lacunae in the legal system,” the division bench of the apex court observed.

The apex court observed that the victim had no opportunity to make an informed choice earlier because of the shortcomings in the society, the legal system and her own family.

“The society judged her, the legal system failed and her own family abandoned her,” the Court observed, adding that the victim is now emotionally attached to the accused and very protective of her small family.

“That is the reason we are exercising power under Article 142, not to impose sentence,” Justice Oka remarked.

The SC had initiated a suo motu case, following some controversial observations made by the Calcutta High Court while acquitting a 25-year old man who was convicted under the POCSO Act.

The high court had remarked earlier that female adolescents should control their sexual urges.

Citing a report submitted by a committee to probe the incident, the court said although the act was a legal offence, the victim did not consider it one.

“The final report concludes that though the incident is seen as crime in law the victim did not accept it as one. The committee records that it was not the legal crime that caused any trauma to the victim but rather it was the consequence that followed which took a toll on her. What she had to face as a consequence was the police, the legal system, and constant battle to save the accused from punishment,” the Court observed.

The Calcutta High Court verdict was set aside by the apex court on August 20 last year. The accused’s conviction under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sections 376(3) and 376(2)(n) of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code was restored.

While restoring the conviction, the SC had observed the high court’s remarks were objectionable, unwarranted and also violated the Article 21 of the Constitution. The Bengal government had also challenged the Calcutta High Court verdict.

At the same time, the Supreme Court had decided to explore the facts of the situation before pronouncing the sentence.

The state government was instructed to constitute a three-member expert committee with a clinical psychologist and a social scientist and a child welfare officer as coordinator and secretary.

The committee also had to speak to the victim, whether she wanted to continue residing with the convict and about the social benefits from the state and central governments that she could avail in the future.

The state government assured the SC that that the victim’s child will be provided quality education.

On April 3 the apex court observed the victim was in need of financial assistance and asked the state government to explore opportunities for the victim to pursue vocational training or part-time employment after completion of her class X examination.