Home  /  Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012  /  Section 38

Section 38: Assistance of an interpreter or translator

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2012
Section 37 All 46 Sections of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 39
Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)
Child Sec 2(1)(d) Special Court Sec 28

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 38

Section 38 of the POCSO Act guarantees the mandatory assistance of an interpreter, translator, special educator, or familiar person whenever the child victim has speech, hearing, or physical disabilities, or speaks a different language or dialect.

  • Statutory Obligation to Appoint: Where the child is unable to communicate in the language of the court or suffers from mental or physical disabilities, the Special Court must take the assistance of an interpreter, translator, or qualified special educator.
  • Engagement of Familiar Persons: Sub-section (1) empowers the court to seek the assistance of a person familiar with the manner of communication of the child, such as a teacher, caregiver, or parent, to facilitate accurate comprehension.
  • State-Funded Remuneration: Sub-section (2) mandates the State Government to frame rules providing for payment of adequate fees, allowances, and expenses to interpreters and experts from public funds.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • State of Rajasthan v. Darshan Singh (2012) 5 SCC 789: The Supreme Court held that the evidence of a deaf and dumb witness recorded with the assistance of an interpreter or through signs and written questions is fully admissible under Section 119 of the Evidence Act (now BSA), provided the interpreter's competence is tested.
  • Eera v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2017) 15 SCC 133: The Supreme Court highlighted that Section 38 reflects Parliament's conscious accommodation for children with disabilities, creating institutional mechanisms to translate the child's deposition faithfully without altering evidentiary standards.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In defense cross-examination, challenge the formal credentials, qualifications, and independence of the interpreter or special educator under Section 38. If the interpreter is related to the complainant or actively prompts or leads the child, record specific objections on the record to impeach the fidelity of the recorded statement.

Section 37 All 46 Sections of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 39