The Supreme Court of India set aside an Allahabad High Court ruling that downplayed serious acts of sexual assault, reaffirming standards for offences. Led by Justice Surya Kant with Joymalya Bagchi and NV Anjaria, the Bench stressed empathy and justice.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has set aside a controversial ruling by the Allahabad High Court that stated actions such as grabbing a child’s breasts, breaking the string of her pajama, and attempting to drag her under a culvert do not amount to the crime of rape or an attempt to rape.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi, and NV Anjaria emphasized that the adjudication of sexual offenses should not only be based on legal definitions but also on empathy.
The Court remarked,
“We cannot agree with the finding of the High Court that the allegations only amount to preparation, but not an attempt, towards the commission of the offence of rape.”
ALSO READ: Thane Rickshaw Driver Acquitted in POCSO Case Over Schoolgirl Modesty Allegation
In its ruling, the Bench warned that courts could not provide “complete justice” if they remain “inconsiderate” to the vulnerabilities of those involved.
The Court stated,
“Our decisions as participants in the legal process, from laying down the procedure that shall have to be faced by common citizens to the final judgment passed in any given case, must reflect the ethos of compassion, humanity, and understanding, which are essential for creating a fair and effective justice system,”
The judges acknowledged the necessity for systemic reforms to foster sensitivity among judges.
They noted,
“There is no doubt that some action is required to be taken to inculcate and nurture an inherent sensitivity and discernment into the approach of members of the judiciary, as well as into the accompanying court procedures.”
The Allahabad High Court had issued its controversial observations on March 17, 2025, while altering a summoning order against two accused.
Facts of the Case:
According to the prosecution, the accused, Pawan and Akash, allegedly groped the 11-year-old victim, after which one of them broke the string of her pajama and attempted to drag her beneath a culvert. Their assault was interrupted by the intervention of bystanders, who forced them to flee, leaving the victim behind.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court in POCSO Case: ‘No Amount of Compensation Can Undo Trauma’
Considering the case as one of attempted rape or attempted penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, the trial court invoked Section 376 (rape) along with Section 18 of the POCSO Act and issued a summoning order under these provisions.
However, the High Court modified the charges against the two men, directing that they face the lesser charge of Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe), along with Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault).
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra remarked,
“…the allegation against accused Pawan and Akash is that they grabbed the breasts of the victim and Akash tried to bring down the lower garment of the victim and for that purpose they had broken the string of her lower garments and tried to drag her beneath the culvert, but due to intervention of witnesses they left the victim and fled away from the place of incident. This fact is not sufficient to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on the victim as apart from these facts, no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim.”
The High Court found no evidence suggesting that the accused had a definitive intent to commit rape, stating that neither the complaint nor the witness statements indicated that Akash had become unsettled after breaking the string of the victim’s pajama.
Supreme Court and its rulling
Subsequently, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the order and stayed it on March 26, 2025.
In its final verdict, the Supreme Court refrained from establishing any new guidelines for judges, stating,
“We are hesitant to undertake, at this stage, a fresh and unguided attempt to lay down any guidelines, without the benefit of a comprehensive understanding of the past endeavours of such nature undertaken by the different Constitutional and statutory bodies, the on-ground results of such efforts, and the varying scope of problems faced by victims and complainants in similarly sensitive cases.”
ALSO READ: POCSO Case || Karnataka HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to EX-CM BS Yediyurappa
Instead, the Court directed the National Judicial Academy (NJA) in Bhopal to form a committee of experts to develop a report on “Developing Guidelines to Inculcate Sensitivity and Compassion into Judges and Judicial Processes in the Context of Sexual Offences and other Vulnerable Cases.”
The committee was also tasked with creating “Draft Guidelines for the Approach of Judges and the Judicial System When Dealing with Cases of Sexual Offences and other Similarly Sensitive Occurrences Involving Vulnerable Victims, Complainants, and/or Witnesses.”
The Court further stipulated that the NJA report should account for linguistic diversity, with draft guidelines presented in straightforward language for better accessibility.
The Court concluded,
“The guidelines, we expect, will not be loaded with heavy, complicated expressions borne from foreign languages and jurisdictions,”
The committee was instructed to submit its report “preferably within three months.”
Case Title: In Re: Order dated 17.03.2025 Passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Cri Rev No. 1449/2024 and Ancillary Issues
Read Attachment:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
