Date of Order: 11 December 2025

Facts of the Case

The writ petition concerns systemic deficiencies in the implementation of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 (POCSO), particularly in relation to the appointment of Support Persons under Section 39 and the deployment of Para Legal Volunteers (PLVs) at police stations across the country. The petitioner placed material before the Court indicating that several States and Union Territories had either failed to notify or fully implement the PLV Scheme and that appointment of Support Persons was grossly inadequate compared to the large pendency of POCSO cases.

The order records a State and Union Territory wise chart of PLV deployment status, including the number of police stations where PLVs have been deployed and where they have not, as reflected on page 7 of the order. A separate chart on pages 8 to 10 sets out, for each State and Union Territory, the number of pending POCSO cases, the number of Support Persons required and the number already appointed, based on affidavits of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) and State Governments.

Contentions of the Parties

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that certain States and Union Territories have adopted a very casual approach to the appointment of PLVs and Support Persons. It was pointed out that some jurisdictions had not yet empanelled and deployed PLVs in all police stations and that even where the scheme formally existed, the absence of adequate funding and monitoring had rendered it ineffective. As a result, child victims of sexual offences often do not receive any meaningful assistance at the crucial investigation stage.

Counsel appearing for various States and Union Territories sought time to obtain instructions regarding the current status of implementation and deployment. The order notes that there was no representation on behalf of at least one Union Territory at the time of hearing. The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) submitted that updated information from all States and Union Territories was essential for a realistic assessment of compliance with Section 39 of POCSO and with the PLV Scheme.

Court’s Analysis

The Supreme Court recorded its concern that the Scheme of PLVs at police stations was either not notified or not effectively implemented in several States and Union Territories. In some jurisdictions, PLVs had not been deployed in any police station and in others deployment was limited to a small fraction of stations. The Court observed that these shortcomings are particularly serious in the context of POCSO cases, where children require immediate support at the time of registration of the FIR and throughout the investigation and trial.

On Support Persons, the Court took note of the chart reflecting POCSO pendency and the very low number of Support Persons appointed as compared to the requirement. The Bench reiterated that Section 39 of POCSO contemplates assistance to child victims through persons or organisations specially trained to support children in the criminal justice process and that such assistance cannot remain illusory. It also noted that State and District Legal Services Authorities are already in place and are well suited to take responsibility for empanelling Support Persons in coordination with Special Courts and the concerned Women and Child Departments.

Order of the Court

The Supreme Court directed all concerned States and Union Territories to:

1. Reassess, in light of current POCSO pendency, the number of Support Persons required and the steps needed for their appointment. Fresh affidavits containing this assessment are to be filed before the next date of hearing.
2. Take steps for empanelment of Support Persons in each district through the State and District Legal Services Authorities. The Court clarified that these directions are in addition to any existing empanelment mechanisms framed by State Governments.
3. Ensure the effective implementation of the PLV Scheme at every police station. States and Union Territories were asked to verify the information in the PLV deployment chart and to address practical issues that hinder full deployment.

The Court further directed that Member Secretaries of District Legal Services Authorities should consult Presiding Officers of Special Courts under POCSO to identify the need for Support Persons in individual cases. Where no Support Person has yet been provided, the Special Court may appoint one for the child victim. Member Secretaries of State Legal Services Authorities are also required to consult the Secretaries of Women and Child Departments in this regard.

Written by Adv. Aiswarya Krishnan