Jodhpur, May 30 -- The Rajasthan high court has held that the special procedural safeguards available under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, especially the mode of cross-examination through judicial intermediation, do not apply once the prosecutrix attains the age of 18. Justice Farjand Ali, while deciding three criminal miscellaneous petitions, on Wednesday made it clear that protections under the Pocso Act are "intrinsically age-contingent and must be confined to those witnesses who fall within the statutory definition of 'child' as per Section 2(d) of the Act." Accordingly, "once a child attains the age of majority during the pendency of trial, he/she no longer retains the status of a 'child,' and hence, the mandatory requirement of routing questions through the Special Court ceases to apply." The court extended this reasoning to Section 37 of the Act as well, which mandates in-camera trials and the presence of a trusted person during a child's testimony. It ruled: "Once the witness crosses the threshold of majority, the application of Section 37 ceases ipso jure, and the trial must thereafter proceed in accordance with the general procedural framework under the Code of Criminal Procedure, unless the court independently finds compelling reasons, duly recorded, to continue such arrangements in the interest of justice or witness welfare." The court warned against overextending Pocso's child-friendly procedures in a manner that dilutes the rights of the accused. "Any contrary interpretation would amount to judicial legislation and would undermine the delicate balance between victim protection and fair trial rights as envisaged under the law," it observed. Setting aside the impugned orders passed by various Special Courts that had denied the accused direct cross-examination of victims who had attained majority, the HC allowed the petitions and directed the trial courts to summon the victims afresh for cross-examination. The high court said: "The trial courts concerned are directed to permit the petitioners to cross-examine the prosecutrix directly, subject to the regulatory powers of the Court to ensure decorum, dignity, and protection from any form of harassment during cross-examination." It emphasised that the judgment must not be taken as an opinion on the merits of the cases: "This judgment shall not be construed as a reflection on the merits of the prosecution's case or the defence, which shall be determined independently on the basis of the evidence on record." The court said: "It is further directed that, henceforth, all Special Courts constituted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and all other courts lawfully empowered to try cases arising under the provisions of the said statute. shall permit the cross-examination of the prosecutrix, who ceased to be child by efflux of time, by the accused or their counsel in accordance with the standard rules of evidence and criminal procedure." The high court added that courts must retain their authority "to prevent any misuse of such liberty and to safeguard the decorum and psychological dignity of the witness."...