The Supreme Court of India has taken up a significant challenge to the Allahabad High Court's controversial judgment which had sparked outrage across the country. The apex court is now examining a petition filed by the mother of a minor girl who was allegedly sexually assaulted, questioning the High Court's interpretation of what constitutes an attempt to rape under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The incident in question involved two accused, Pawan and Akash, who were alleged to have committed serious acts of sexual aggression against an 11-year-old girl. According to the prosecution, the two men grabbed the child’s breasts, with one of them breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert.
Read Also:- Why Should Lawyers Be Spared for Misconduct?: Supreme Court Questions Bar Members Over Misleading SLP Filing
In response to these allegations, the trial court had initially framed charges under Section 376 read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act—offences related to attempt to commit rape or penetrative sexual assault. However, the Allahabad High Court revised this decision and ruled that the actions of the accused did not constitute an attempt to rape.
“The allegations levelled against the accused Pawan and Akash and facts of the case hardly constitute an offence of attempt to rape... the prosecution must establish that it had gone beyond the stage of preparation. The difference between preparation and actual attempt to commit an offence consists chiefly in the greater degree of determination,”
— observed Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, while partly allowing the revision plea of the accused.
The High Court instead directed that the accused be tried under the lesser charges of Section 354-B of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe, along with Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act concerning aggravated sexual assault.
Read Also:- Supreme Court: Conviction Cannot Be Based Solely on 'Last Seen' Theory Without Disproving Accused's Alibi
This ruling led to widespread criticism and sparked a public debate on judicial sensitivity in cases involving child sexual abuse. The Supreme Court responded by taking suo motu cognizance of the matter after receiving a letter from Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta on behalf of the NGO 'We the Women of India'.
The apex court had already put a hold on the High Court’s judgment, calling out the insensitivity of the observations made.
“We are at pains to say that some of the observations made in the impugned judgment, particularly paras 21, 24, and 26, depict a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the author of the judgment,”
— noted a bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih on March 26.
The Court further emphasized that this was not a hurried decision by the High Court, but a verdict delivered after nearly four months of reservation. The Supreme Court found the reasoning not only legally flawed but also
“totally unknown to the tenets of law and depict[ing] total insensitivity and inhuman approach.”
Along with issuing a stay on the High Court's ruling, the Supreme Court also sent notices to the Union Government, the Uttar Pradesh State Government, and all parties involved in the High Court proceedings. During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared before the Court and strongly criticized the judgment, calling it “shocking”.
The new petition before the Supreme Court was filed by the victim’s mother in association with a child rights organization named Just Rights For Children Alliance. The bench of Justices Gavai and Masih also directed the High Court Registry to redact the name of the complainant in the court records, respecting the privacy and dignity of the minor victim.
Interestingly, a previous writ petition challenging the same judgment under Article 32 of the Constitution was dismissed by another bench led by Justices Bela M. Trivedi and PB Varale on the grounds that the petitioner had no direct connection to the case (lack of locus standi).
With the current plea filed by the victim’s mother, the matter has gained renewed judicial attention. The Supreme Court is now poised to re-examine what constitutes "attempt to rape" under Indian law, particularly in cases involving minors, and its final verdict could set a significant precedent in the interpretation of child protection laws.
Case Title: JUST RIGHTS FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE AND ANR. Versus AKASH AND ORS., Diary No. 15692-2025
