Bengaluru, Aug 18 (IANS) The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash the FIR lodged against a woman in connection with an alleged sexual assault on a minor boy and made a significant observation that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) is gender neutral, and the provisions of this act will apply to both men and women.

The bench headed by Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the verdict in this regard dismissing the petition by 52-year-old woman in this regard on Monday. The sexual assault case was registered against her by the parents of the victim minor boy.

The petitioner contended that there is delay of four years in reporting of the crime. The counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that complaint under Section 4 and 6 has been registered for penetrative sexual assault and aggravated penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act.

The alleged crime occurred in 2020 and the FIR has been filed in 2025, the counsel highlighted. He further submitted that the victim is a 13-year-old school going boy and was a neighbour. To avoid the repayment, the petitioner has been set up in this case, the counsel argued.

The bench however, rejecting the submission observed that POCSO Act being progressive is intended to safeguard sanctity of childhood it is rooted in gender neutrality with its beneficent object being protection of children, irrespective of sex. The act is gender neutral.

The court further observed that even if there was a delay in filing the complaint (registering the crime), it cannot be used as a reason to cancel or dismiss the legal case, because the seriousness of the alleged offence and the fact that the victim is underage (or a minor) are more important considerations.

The excuses about psychology and potency tests are not convincing and have no weight in today’s legal framework, the court maintained. The court firmly rejected the claim that in sexual activity a woman only plays a passive role while the man is the active one and made it clear that such a notion is outdated, wrong, and cannot be accepted in law.

–IANS

mka/pgh