Synopsis
On March 26, the Supreme Court intervened to stay an Allahabad High Court ruling, which deemed that actions like grabbing breasts and breaking a pyjama string did not meet the criteria for attempted rape. The apex court highlighted the lack of sensitivity in the ruling.Key Takeaways
- Supreme Court halts Allahabad HC ruling.
- Judgment criticized for insensitivity.
- Case to be reviewed in two weeks.
- Charges against accused modified to lesser offense.
- Legal definitions of attempted rape discussed.
New Delhi, March 26 (NationPress) The Supreme Court on Wednesday put a hold on the Allahabad High Court's ruling that stated grabbing breasts and breaking the pyjama string did not qualify for a charge of attempt to rape.
A Bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih remarked that the criticized observations reflect a complete lack of sensitivity and an inhumane perspective from the judgment's author.
The ruling was noted to be deliberate, as it was issued four months following the reservation of the order.
The Justice Gavai-led Bench issued notifications to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh government, and all parties involved in the case before the Allahabad High Court, including the defendants.
The apex court requested assistance from Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the adjudication of this suo-moto case.
This issue will be addressed again in two weeks, in conjunction with the Special Leave Petition submitted by the victim's mother.
The Supreme Court has initiated a suo moto case titled ‘In Re: Order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 1449/2024 and ancillary issues’ following a letter from senior advocate Shobha Gupta, who implored the Chief Justice of India to take note of the observations made by a single-judge Bench of the Allahabad High Court regarding a modification to a summoning order.
In its determination, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra's Bench of the Allahabad High Court modified the charges against two defendants, who had initially been summoned by the trial court for offenses under Section 376 IPC (rape) and Section 18 (punishment for attempt to commit an offense) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Partially allowing the revision petition of the accused, Justice Mishra's Bench stated that they should instead be summoned for a lesser offense under Sections 354(b) IPC, which pertains to assault or abuse of a woman with the intent to disrobe or compel her to be naked, in conjunction with Section 9/10 of the POCSO Act.
Under the POCSO Act, Section 9 stipulates punishment for aggravated sexual assault on a child victim, while Section 10 outlines a punishment of imprisonment up to seven years, with a minimum of five years and also includes a fine.
According to the prosecution's account, the two accused, identified as Pawan and Akash, grabbed the victim's breasts, and one of them broke her pyjama string, attempting to drag her beneath a culvert. They fled the scene after witnesses intervened.
The Allahabad High Court stated that prima facie, a charge of attempted rape was not substantiated against the accused, asserting, “There is no allegation that the accused attempted penetrative sexual assault against the victim. The allegations against Pawan and Akash, along with the case facts, hardly constitute an offense of attempted rape.”
It further added, “To establish a charge of attempted rape, the prosecution must demonstrate that it has surpassed the stage of preparation. The distinction between preparation and an actual attempt is primarily in the higher degree of determination.”
Interestingly, a coordinate Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and Prasanna B Varale of the Supreme Court, on Monday, declined to entertain a public interest litigation contesting the March 17 ruling from the Allahabad HC.
