Many people accused under POCSO believe that once the police file a chargesheet, the Special Court must proceed to trial whatever it contains. That is not the law. If the chargesheet does not disclose a prima facie case, you can be discharged in a POCSO sexual assault case, because no court may send a person to trial without material showing each legal foundation of the offence. I must be candid, though. Where the child's recorded statement identifies the accused and describes the contact, the Special Court will ordinarily find a prima facie case, and the statutory presumptions will apply at trial. Discharge succeeds only where the record, read as a whole, lacks an essential foundation.

First, the framework. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) defines a child in Section 2(1)(d) as a person below eighteen. Section 7 defines sexual assault, punished under Section 8, and Section 9 defines aggravated sexual assault, punished under Section 10. Sexual harassment without physical contact falls under Sections 11 and 12. The Special Court, deemed a Court of Session under Section 31, decides discharge under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), formerly Section 227 CrPC. The police report is filed under Section 193 BNSS (formerly Section 173 CrPC).

A "prima facie case" means material that, taken at face value and left unrebutted, would reasonably support a conviction. In State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh (1977) and Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal (1979), the Supreme Court held that grave suspicion justifies a charge, while mere suspicion does not. In State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa (1996) and M.E. Shivalingamurthy v. CBI (2020), it stressed that the material must disclose each ingredient of the offence. In Sajjan Kumar v. CBI (2010), it confirmed that the Judge may sift the material for this limited purpose.

For a Section 7 charge, the chargesheet must contain prima facie material of three foundations:

1. The survivor was a child, meaning below eighteen at the time.
2. Physical contact of the kind described in Section 7 occurred.
3. The particular accused was the person involved.

For an aggravated charge under Section 9, there must also be material of the specific aggravating circumstance alleged. The element of sexual intent is presumed under Section 30 once these foundational facts are established.

The statutory presumptions are central. Section 29 of POCSO presumes that the accused committed the offence unless the contrary is proved, and Section 30 presumes a culpable mental state. Both operate once the foundational facts are established. At the discharge stage, the Judge therefore asks whether the chargesheet contains prima facie material of those foundational facts. If it does not, the presumptions cannot fill the gap.

In Attorney General for India v. Satish (2021), the Supreme Court held that sexual intent, not skin-to-skin contact, decides a Section 7 charge, and that the provision must be read to protect children. So an argument that the contact was over clothing will not show the absence of a prima facie case.

The most common situation where no prima facie case exists concerns age. If valid documents in the prosecution's own record show that the survivor was eighteen or older, there is no prima facie case under POCSO at all. In Jarnail Singh v. State of Haryana (2013) and P. Yuvaprakash v. State (2023), the Supreme Court held that age should be determined under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. That section gives priority to school records and birth certificates, with medical opinion used only where they are absent. Age becomes central where the chargesheet relies on medical opinion despite contrary documents, or contains no reliable age evidence at all.

A second situation concerns identity. The child's statements under Sections 24 and 25 of POCSO may not identify or describe a particular accused. If no other material connects him either, there may be no prima facie case against him. This is especially relevant where several persons are named.

A third situation concerns the provision charged. Where the material does not disclose the aggravating circumstance required by Section 9, there is no prima facie case of aggravated sexual assault, though there may be one under Section 7. Where it discloses no physical contact, only words, gestures, or showing objects with sexual intent, there is no prima facie case under Section 7. There may, however, be one of sexual harassment under Section 11. The Special Court may frame the correct charge.

To test your chargesheet against these requirements, request a confidential chargesheet review with Aapka Legal Advice. An advocate will analyse the age documents and the child's recorded statements strictly from a legal perspective. They will then identify whether each foundational fact is genuinely supported.

You may also consult our panel of retired judges, many of whom presided over Special Courts and decided exactly this question at the charge stage in POCSO cases. Working with the Top Criminal Lawyers in India | Aapka Legal Advice, they help you present a lawful, focused argument.

You must understand what does not show the absence of a prima facie case:

• Consent: legally irrelevant where the survivor is a child.
• The child's character or conduct: irrelevant.
• Lack of corroboration: the child's credible testimony can support conviction on its own.
• Absence of injuries or of independent witnesses: not decisive in sexual assault cases.
• Delay in reporting: common and not a ground in itself.

The Judge does not conduct a mini-trial, as cautioned in Sheoraj Singh Ahlawat v. State of U.P. (2013).

Evidence collected by the police but omitted from the chargesheet can matter. Original school or birth records showing the survivor's true age may be summoned under Section 94 BNSS, as recognised in Nitya Dharmananda v. Gopal Sheelum Reddy (2018). Otherwise, defence documents are generally excluded at the charge stage, following State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005). Electronic evidence must be supported by a certificate under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

Where the accused was himself under eighteen, the issue is jurisdiction as well as a prima facie case. The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 governs, and the case must proceed before the Juvenile Justice Board. A Special Court proceeding against a juvenile as an adult without the required procedure acts without jurisdiction.

Protect your liberty throughout. Because Sections 8 and 10 carry up to five and seven years, the Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) safeguards apply, and a notice under Section 35(3) BNSS should ordinarily precede arrest. Anticipatory bail is available under Section 482 BNSS, and regular bail under Sections 480 and 483 BNSS. Have no contact with the child or family, and never disclose the child's identity, which is prohibited under Section 23 of POCSO and Section 72 BNS. These protections rest on Article 21 of the Constitution.

If charges are framed despite the absence of a prima facie case, revision lies to the High Court under Section 438 BNSS (formerly Section 397 CrPC). Sanjay Kumar Rai v. State of U.P. (2021) confirms that framing of charges is revisable. The High Court may also act under Section 528 BNSS and Articles 226 and 227. POCSO offences cannot be quashed on compromise, following Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan (2019).

In conclusion, the Special Court must discharge you under Section 250 BNSS, formerly Section 227 CrPC, or frame the correct charge, if the chargesheet lacks prima facie material that:

• the survivor was a child;
• physical contact of the kind in Section 7 occurred;
• you were involved;
• for a Section 9 charge, the aggravating circumstance existed.

The presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 cannot replace missing foundational facts. With experienced criminal lawyers and retired judges guiding you, you can be discharged in a POCSO sexual assault case where the chargesheet does not disclose a prima facie case, through a lawful strategy that respects the child's protections. This is general legal information, and your specific facts should be reviewed by a qualified advocate.