Days after the Allahabad High Court ruled that grabbing the breasts of a minor girl, breaking her pyjama string, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert does not amount to rape or an attempt to rape, the Supreme Court has taken suo moto cognisance of the matter. The case has sparked widespread criticism and legal debate over the interpretation of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The matter is set to be listed before a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih. The intervention comes after a letter was sent by Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta, a prominent legal expert and founder of the NGO 'We the Women of India,' urging the top court to review the decision.
Read Also:- Employment Claims Must Be Supported by Documentation: Supreme Court Ruling
Case Details
According to the prosecution, the accused, Pawan and Akash, allegedly assaulted an 11-year-old girl by grabbing her breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert. The trial court, considering the gravity of the allegations, had invoked Section 376 of the IPC along with Section 18 (attempt to commit an offence) of the POCSO Act and issued a summoning order under these sections.
However, the Allahabad High Court ruled that the actions of the accused did not constitute an attempt to rape and instead directed that they be tried under Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) along with Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault). The decision led to significant public outrage and legal scrutiny.
In its ruling, the High Court made a distinction between preparation and attempt, stating:
"The allegations leveled against the accused Pawan and Akash and facts of the case hardly constitute an offence of attempt to rape. In order to bring out a charge 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."
Read Also:- Supreme Court Criticizes Senthil Balaji's Counsel for Raising "Technical Defence" in Bail Recall Plea
This observation was made by a bench led by Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra as it partially allowed the criminal revision plea filed by the accused.
The ruling faced immense backlash from legal experts, activists, and the general public. Many argued that the High Court's interpretation undermines the purpose of the POCSO Act, which is designed to protect minors from sexual offences. Critics pointed out that the accused's actions were more than mere preparation and should have been classified as an attempt to commit a more serious offence.
Legal experts also drew attention to a recent Supreme Court bench ruling comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and P.B. Varale, which dismissed an Article 32 writ petition challenging the Allahabad High Court's order on grounds of locus. This further complicated the legal discourse surrounding the case.
