Voices. Verdicts. Vision

Voices. Verdicts. Vision

SC: Child Abuse Provision Cannot Be Invoked for Trivial or Incidental Acts

Santosh Sahadev Khajnekar Vs The State of Goa, [order dated August 26,2025]

Child Abuse Provision

The Supreme Court partly allowed an appeal challenging concurrent findings of the Children’s Court at Panaji and the High Court of Bombay at Goa in a 2013 case involving allegations of assault on a school child.

The appellant had been convicted under Sections 323, 352, and 504 of the IPC and Section 8(2) of the Goa Children’s Act, 2003, after allegedly striking a child with his son’s school bag. The trial court imposed substantive imprisonment, including one year under the child abuse provision. The High Court later reduced the sentence but upheld the convictions.

Before the Supreme Court, counsel for the appellant argued that the incident was trivial, lacked intent, and did not fall within the statutory definition of “child abuse,” which requires cruelty, exploitation, or deliberate ill-treatment. It was also highlighted that the FIR was filed after an unexplained delay and that the appellant, a daily-wage labourer, had already undergone part of the sentence. The State opposed further leniency, citing the seriousness of offences against children.

The Bench held that not every trivial or isolated act involving a child amounts to “child abuse” under the 2003 Act. To attract penal consequences, there must be evidence of deliberate harm or cruelty. The Court also found that the conviction under Section 504 IPC (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace) was unsustainable.However, the convictions under Sections 323 and 352 IPC were upheld. Taking into account the lapse of time, the nature of the incident, and the socio-economic background of the appellant, the Court directed his release on probation for one year upon executing a bond of good behaviour.


Appearances:

For the Appellant: Mr. Amrendra Kumar Mehta(AOR),

Adv Pallavi Daem, Adv. Gunjan Kumari, Adv. Anubhav Bhardwaj

For the Respondent :Adv Har Karam Jot Kaur, Ms. Shikha Sarin, (AOR)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *