Allahabad High Court has modified a trial court’s summoning order, altering the charges against three men accused of attempting to rape a minor girl. In its order, the court observed that grabbing the breasts of the girl and breaking the string of her pyjama is not an offence of rape or an attempt to rape. A bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra was hearing a petition by the accused, who challenged a trial court’s summons to face trial under Section 376 IPC (Rape) and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act.
“Grabbing Breasts Not Attempted Rape” HC Decision Sparks Public Outrage
Why In News
- Allahabad High Court has modified a trial court’s summoning order, altering the charges against three men accused of attempting to rape a minor girl. In its order, the court observed that grabbing the breasts of the girl and breaking the string of her pyjama is not an offence of rape or an attempt to rape.
- A bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra was hearing a petition by the accused, who challenged a trial court’s summons to face trial under Section 376 IPC (Rape) and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act.
What Is The Case?
- According to the prosecution, the accused men and the girl are residents of the same village. The girl was returning with her mother from a relative’s place when the accused men offered her a lift, assuring her that they would drop her home.
- Following this, one of the accused grabbed the girl’s breasts and the other broke the string of her pyjama and tried to drag her beneath the culvert. However, due to the interference of passersby, they fled the spot.
- A trial court found it to be a case of attempt to rape or attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault within the purview of the Pocso Act. The court invoked Section 376 with Section 18 (attempt to commit an offence) of the Pocso Act and issued summons to the accused men to face the trial. The accused men moved the high court to challenge the summons. They argued that no offence under Section 376 IPC was committed even if the complaint version is taken on its face value.
What Did Allahabad High Court Judge Say
- During the hearing in high court, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra noted that there was no material on record to show that the accused men had determined to rape the girl.
- “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,” Justice Mishra said in his order, as cited by LiveLaw.
- Justice Mishra said that while the accused tried to drag the girl beneath the culvert and broke the string of her pyjami, there was no allegation that he “tried to commit penetrative sexual assault.”
- “It is also not stated by witnesses that due to this act of the accused the victim got naked or got undressed. There is no allegation that accused tried to commit penetrative sexual assault against the victim,” the judge observed in his order.
- “This fact is not sufficient to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on victim as apart from these facts no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim,” he added.
- The judge noted that based on initial evidence, the charge of attempted rape was not established against the accused. Instead, they were to be summoned under the lesser charge of Section 354(b) of the IPC, which pertains to assault or use of criminal force on a woman with the intent to disrobe or compel her to be naked, along with Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act. Section 9(M) specifies that sexual assault on a child below twelve years qualifies as ‘aggravated sexual assault’ and is punishable under Section 10 of the Act.
- Notably, the high court’s order contains conflicting references to the victim’s age—stating 14 years in one instance and older than 11 years in another. However, since the court invoked Section 9(m) of the Pocso Act, which applies to victims under 12, it can be inferred that the high court considered the victim’s age to be between 11 and 12 years.
- The high court then directed that the accused be tried under the minor charge of Section 354-B IPC read with Sections 9/10 of the Pocso Act.
Remarks
- Union Minister Annapurna Devi expressed her disappointment over Allahabad High Court’s recent ruling that grabbing the breasts of a girl, breaking the string of her pyjama and trying to drag her does not amount to charges of rape or an attempt to rape. The minister called it a wrong judgment.
- “I don’t support this decision. The Supreme Court should also take note of this decision because it will have adverse impact on a civil society. It has no place in a civilised society,” BJP leader Annapurna Devi said.
