Presumption of Guilt and Burden of Proof

4.1 Section 29 — Reverse Burden of Proof

This is one of the most constitutionally significant provisions:

When a person is prosecuted for committing or abetting or attempting to commit any offence under Sections 3, 5, 7, and 9 of POCSO, the Special Court shall presume that such person has committed or abetted or attempted to commit the offence unless the contrary is proved.

Ordinary criminal law principle: "Innocent until proven guilty" — prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

POCSO Section 29: Accused is presumed guilty — accused must prove innocence. This reversal is justified because:

1. Children are usually sole witnesses — corroboration difficult
2. Abuser is often in a position of authority — power imbalance
3. Trauma of child witnesses makes detailed testimony difficult

Section 30: The Special Court shall presume that the accused had sexual intent — again, the accused must rebut this presumption.

4.2 Constitutionality of Reverse Burden

Courts have generally treated Sections 29 and 30 as statutory presumptions that support child-protection prosecutions, but not as a substitute for the prosecution's duty to establish the foundational facts of the case. The reverse burden is therefore read as a protective evidentiary rule, not as automatic proof of guilt.

---