Supreme Court said – Allahabad HC’s comment on rape is insensitive: stay on the decision; High Court had said – holding the breast of a minor, breaking the string is not rape
The Supreme Court has stayed the decision of Allahabad High Court, in which the HC had said that holding the breast of a minor girl and breaking the string of her pajama is not rape or an attempt to rape.
A bench of Justice BR Gavai and AG Masih heard the case on Wednesday. The bench said, “Some comments made in the High Court order show a completely insensitive and inhuman attitude.” The Supreme Court has notified the Center, Uttar Pradesh Government, and other parties and sought a reply.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih said—
This is a very serious matter, and the judge who made this decision showed great insensitivity. We are sad to say that the person who wrote the decision completely lacked sensitivity.
A day earlier on Tuesday, the SC had decided to hear the High Court’s decision itself. The Supreme Court was hearing this decision after opposition from legal experts, politicians, and experts from different fields.
However, earlier the Supreme Court had refused to hear a petition filed on the same case. In this petition, the demand was made to remove the controversial part of the judgment.
What did the Allahabad High Court say
‘Gripping a girl’s private parts, breaking the string of her pajama and forcibly trying to drag her under the culvert does not constitute a case of rape or ‘attempt to rape’.’
On Monday, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of Allahabad High Court, while giving this verdict, changed the sections imposed on the 2 accused. At the same time, the criminal revision petition filed against 3 accused was accepted.
3 year 3-year-old case, the mother had lodged an FIR
A woman from Kasganj, UP, had filed a complaint in the court on January 12, 2022. She alleged that on November 10, 2021, she had gone to her sister-in-law’s house in Patiyali, Kasganj, with her 14-year-old daughter. She was returning to her home in the evening of the same day. Pawan, Akash, and Ashok, residents of the village, met on the way.
Pawan offered to drop his daughter home on his bike. The mother trusted him and made her sit on the bike, but Pawan and Akash grabbed the girl’s private part on the way. Akash broke the string of her pajamas while trying to pull her under the culvert.
Upon hearing the girl’s screams, Satish and Bhure, passing by on a tractor, reached the spot. On this, the accused threatened both of them by showing a country-made pistol and fled.
The victim’s mother went to register an FIR, but the police did not take any action
When the victim’s mother reached the house of the accused, Pawan to complain, Pawan’s father, Ashok, abused her and threatened to kill her. The woman went to the police station the next day to register an FIR. When the police did not take any action, he approached the court.
On March 21, 2022, the court treated the application as a complaint and proceeded with the case. The statements of the complainant and witnesses were recorded. A case was registered against the accused Pawan and Akash under sections 376, 354, 354B of the IPC and section 18 of the POCSO Act. At the same time, a case was registered against the accused Ashok under sections 504 and 506 of the IPC.
The accused refused the summons order and filed a revision before the High Court. That is, they told the court that these allegations should be reconsidered. A single bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra had accepted the criminal revision petition.
The Supreme Court had overturned a similar decision of the Bombay High Court
On November 19, 2021, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court in another similar case. It was said that touching the sexual organs of a child or any act involving physical contact with sexual intent would be considered sexual assault under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. Intent is important in this, not skin-to-skin contact.
In January 2021, Bombay High Court Additional Judge Pushpa Ganediwala acquitted a sexual assault accused, saying that groping the private parts of a minor victim without skin-to-skin contact cannot be considered a crime under POCSO. However, the Supreme Court later overturned the verdict.
Also Read: KL Rahul Turns Father, Misses Lucknow SuperGiants IPL 2025 Opener
