A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol Sandeep Mehta on 26th August 2025 have upheld that the act of hitting a child with a school bag during a scuffle does not meet the threshold of “child abuse” as given in Section 8 of The Goa Children’s Act,2003. The medical evidence suggested injuries that could have been the result of a fall,not necessarily the result of an act by the Appellant . Conviction under this section is not deemed sustainable.The incident is being described as a minor scuffle ,not indicative of intentional child abuse. The Apex Court emphasized that the Goa Children’s Act targets serious forms of abuse,not trivial or incidental acts.
An appeal was lodged by the Appellant in the HC of Goa after he was convicted under Sections 323 and 352 IPC. The HC partly allowed the appeal reducing sentences under Sections 323,352,504 IPC and 8(2) of the Goa Children’s Act. The Appellant argued that the ct of hitting a child with a school bag was unintentional and does not constitute “child abuse” under Section 2(m) of the Goa Children’s Act, which requires deliberate maltreatment and emphasized that as a first-time offender, he deserved probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, for offenses with punishment less than 7 years.
The Supreme Court overturned the convictions for child abuse and intentional insult due to insufficient evidence of intent or severity. It upheld convictions for minor physical offenses but granted probation, considering the Appellant’s circumstances and the nature of the offeces.
