Unconstitutional provisions in the Goa Children's Act?


This set of queries relates to the Goa Children's Act 2003


GCA 2003 32(1) Burden of Proof : Whenever any offence is alleged to have been committed against a child, the burden of proving that such offence has not been committed by the accused shall lie on the accused.

QUESTION A:  Is this compatible with the Constitutional right of the Accused to be considered Innocent unless proven Guilty?

GCA 2003 8 (2) ...Whoever commits any Grave Sexual Assault shall be punished with imprisonment of either descripttion for a term that shall not be less than seven years (...) Whoever commits incest shall be punished with imprisonment of either descripttion for a term of one year plus fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

QUESTION B:  Is Incest NOT a Grave Sexual Assault?  So, why this relative leniency for Incest?

re: an accusation and FIR against a priest accused of molesting a young girl, a lawyer is reported as saying the following

" It was settled out of court. I hear compensation was paid to the victim....."


QUESTION C: Is not Sexual Molestation a criminal act? If so, how can it said (that too by a lawyer) as having been "settled out of court"?

Grateful for any input.





Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Forensics & Evidence     |    x