Abstract

In order to establish a thorough legal framework for addressing child sexual abuse in India through child-sensitive procedures and evidentiary presumptions, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) was passed. Significant obstacles still exist in the judicial consideration of child testimony, notwithstanding its progressive design. This essay explores the conflict between the psychological realities of child victims' suffering and conventional evidential standards, namely the emphasis on consistency, immediacy, and coherence. The study makes the case that trauma typically causes delayed disclosure, fragmented memory, and testimonial inconsistencies—all of which are commonly misconstrued as signs of unreliability—based on psychiatric research and judicial developments. It also draws attention to the possibility of secondary victimization in adversarial procedures and the uneven implementation of child-friendly norms. In support of a trauma-informed approach to evidence review, the study highlights the necessity of expert intervention, judicial training, and contextual interpretation of testimony. It finds that in order to maintain the pursuit of justice's sensitivity to the lived reality of child survivors, it is imperative to reconsider believability standards.

Keywords