The Allahabad High Court’s recent judgment, in which grabbing the breasts of a minor and breaking the string of her pyjama was not considered an attempt to rape, has led to widespread outrage across India. The judgment has been vociferously denounced by legal scholars, politicians, activists, and even the public, who argue that such interpretative aberrations hinder the war against sexual violence and send ominous signals to society.
The Controversial Judgment
The judgment, which was rendered by Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of the Allahabad High Court, arose from the case of Pawan and Akash, charged with allegedly molesting an 11-year-old girl in Kasganj, Uttar Pradesh.
The trial court had earlier summoned the accused under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Rapists-but not according to the High Court, which obviously denied the same, instead modifying the charges to Section 354-B (assault with intent to disrobe) of IPC and Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act-on the grounds that these actions did not fall under the definition of an attempt to rape.
The court opined that the actions of the accused, although certainly heinous, were, nevertheless, not sufficient to express “determination to commit rape” and were still in the realm of preparatory activities. The judgment stated that the allegations must establish the intent of the wrongdoers beyond mere preparatory acts so as to qualify as an attempt to rape.
Kapil Sibal’s Reaction
Kapil Sibal, a senior advocate and president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, expressed outrage on social media by stating, “God save this country with such judges adorning the Bench!” He condemned the judiciary for being soft on delinquent judges and warned that such decisions would cause erosion of public faith in the system of justice.
He further cautioned that reading sexual assault cases narrowly will set a dangerous precedent. He said that judges need to exercise restraint in interpreting sexual violence laws since they impact society.
Legal Experts and Activists Condemnation
This judgment has been severely condemned by eminent legal minds. Shobha Gupta, an advocate, describes the judgment as grossly erroneous and even more high-handed and insensitive in that it conveys a very wrong message in a country where crimes of sexual nature are rising. She has written to Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna to consider taking action against Justice Mishra without delay.
Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa slammed the court’s reasoning, maintaining that actions such as squeezing the breast or breaking the strings of pyjamas leave no doubt about the intention to commit rape. According to him, all these actions go way beyond preparation and must be classified as an attempt to rape in view of existing laws.
Swati Maliwal and Indira Jaising are other activists who naturally spoke out. Maliwal condemned the judgment as being “insensitive” and “dangerous for society,” while urging the intervention of the Supreme Court. Jaising called upon the apex court to take suo motu cognizance of such judicial rulings.
Political Reactions
Annapurna Devi, a Union Minister, denounced the ruling as “wrong,” saying that it has no place in a civilized society. She has called the Supreme Court to review the judgment, as it affects society’s fight against sexual violence adversely. Other political leaders reiterated the same call for judicial reform that would allow the system to impose stricter accountability in sexual offense cases.
Public Backlash
There is a significant backlash against the verdict on social media sites, where citizens express shock and disbelief. Many have questioned how conduct such as molesting a minor could be trivialized in lesser offenses. It has rekindled discussions on judicial responsiveness to sexual violence survivors.
Implications for Society
Critics argue judgments like this weaken laws like POCSO made specifically to protect children against sexual abuse. It will act with fear and intimidation so that survivors will choose not to report a crime because of weakening trust in the judicial outcome. The judgment also brings forward an issue concerning judicial interpretation of sexual offenses with respect to not being defined clearly as attempts to rape.
Call for Judicial Reforms
This controversy has revived the debate about judicial reform. Activists and legal experts have put forward suggestions such as gender sensitization courses for judges and more stringent oversight mechanisms. Many believe that these are urgent and necessary components to provide justice to survivors and ensure public confidence in the justice system.
Discussions surrounding the fallout of this judgment will continue, essentially compounding the urgency of a victim-centered approach in handling sexual violence cases. Increased pressure will be put on the Supreme Court to intervene and set out what comes under an attempt to rape in accordance with Indian law.
In a highly controversial take recently, the Allahabad High Court stated that acts such as grabbing a child’s breasts and breaking the string of her pyjamas do not amount to rape or attempted rape but surely fall under the category of aggravated sexual assault. The judgment has started widespread outrage among legal experts, activists, and government officials. The public despise of the decision has led to calls for accountability and a revaluation of the legal interpretations of sexual offences.
The Incident and Court’s Ruling
The case in question involves an 11-year-old girl, resident of Kasganj, Uttar Pradesh, who was allegedly assaulted in 2021 by accused Pawan and Akash. The prosecution story states that the accused grabbed the victim’s breasts, tore her pyjama string, and attempted to drag her under a culvert. The assault was interrupted by passers-by and the assailants consequently, fled the scene.
The trial court initially had summoned the accused under charges of rape and relevant sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. However, upon appeal, the Allahabad High Court modified the charges, stating that the actions did not constitute rape or an attempt to rape but rather amounted to assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe and aggravated sexual assault under Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) along with Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act.
Legal Reasoning Behind the Judgment
The court’s reasoning was that the actions of the accused, while reprehensible, did not meet the legal threshold of an “attempt to rape.” Justice Mishra observed that for an act to constitute an attempt to rape, there must be a clear demonstration of determination beyond mere preparation. The ruling emphasized that while sexual assault was evident, the intent to commit rape was not sufficiently established to warrant a charge under Section 376 IPC.
Criticism and Outrage
The High Court’s ruling has been met with significant criticism from various quarters:
Union Minister for Women and Child Development, Annapurna Devi, expressed strong disagreement with the decision, stating,
“I am completely against this decision and the Supreme Court should take serious note of it. Such a ruling has no place in a civilized society.”
She further warned that the judgment could have a negative impact on society and undermine efforts to protect women and children from sexual violence.
Legal experts have also condemned the ruling. Advocate Anju Dubey noted that mere touching of a victim’s private parts is sufficient to constitute rape, as held in various judgments, and penetration is not a requisite.
Senior Supreme Court advocate Shobha Gupta has written a letter to the Chief Justice of India, urging immediate judicial intervention. She wrote,
“This interpretation is completely incorrect and demonstrates an insensitive and irresponsible approach to sexual offences. I am writing with deep distress and concern, not just as a lawyer, but as a woman and as a representative of ‘We the Women of India.’”
Prominent activist Swati Maliwal, Chairperson of the Delhi Commission for Women, termed the ruling “shameful and dangerous.” She stated,
“If this is not an attempt to rape, then what is? The judiciary must stop trivializing sexual crimes against women and children.”
Legal expert Anju Dubey also pointed out that,
“multiple judicial precedents have established that touching a victim’s private parts in a sexual manner can constitute rape. The ruling ignores this settled legal principle.”
An outcry for judicial accountability
With the increasing public outcry, demands have been raised for the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognizance of the matter. Legal experts believe that a review by the apex court is necessary to ensure consistency in the interpretation of sexual offence laws and to prevent any dilution of protections afforded to women and children under the law that would allow the perpetrators to prey handily.
About Authors
Tanishq, a law student at the Department of Legal Studies and Research, Barkatullah Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal, is a budding legal writer with a sharp eye for evolving legal landscapes. Passionate about Intellectual Property Rights, Constitutional Law, and Women and Child Safety Laws, Tanishq actively explores contemporary legal nuances through writing and research.
Syeda Ayesha is a passionate 3rd year BBA LLB student at Sultan-Ul-Uloom College of Law in Hyderabad, with a special interest in criminal law and family law. She has built her academic journey on a solid foundation of legal principles, progressing from basic to advanced levels, and is eager to apply this knowledge in practice. Determined to gain practical experience, she is committed to learning more about the law. Ayesha is excited about the opportunity to work in a dynamic legal environment, which she sees as a valuable avenue for both personal and professional growth.