Today (On February 23), the Supreme Court scheduled a hearing for May 2 to examine a suo motu petition and an appeal from West Bengal concerning a controversial remark made by the Calcutta High Court. The remark in question pertains to guidance offered to girls on managing sexual urges. The Court will address the matter concerns raised regarding the appropriateness and implications of such advice.
NEW DELHI: Today, (On February 23), the Supreme Court announced the decision to address the Calcutta High Court verdict concerning advice given to adolescent girls regarding the “control of sexual urges.” Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan have taken notice of certain remarks made by the Calcutta High Court’s division bench during a case involving alleged sexual assault.
READ ALSO: Supreme Court Directs J&K Administration to Publish Internet Review Orders
The Supreme Court’s hearing, scheduled for May 2, will hear both the appeal filed by West Bengal against the October 18, 2023 verdict and a suo motu writ petition initiated by the Supreme Court itself.
The Supreme Court criticized the High Court’s verdict on December 8, 2023, and stated some of its remarks as “highly objectionable and completely unwarranted.” The apex court emphasized the importance of judges refraining from “preaching” in their judgments.
In its order passed on December 8 last year, the apex court referred to certain observations made by the High Court and said,
“Prima facie, the said observations are completely in violation of the rights of the adolescents guaranteed under Article 21(right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India.”
It had been observed that the issue before the high court was about the legality and validity of the order and judgement dated September 19, 2022, by which a man was convicted of offences under sections 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (kidnapping, abducting, or inducing a woman to compel her marriage) of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act.
Background
The controversial remarks made by the Calcutta High Court arose during an appeal where the High Court acquitted a man accused of sexual assault. The High Court’s statement implied that female adolescents should control their sexual urges to avoid societal stigma.
In its verdict, the High Court acquitted the man, stating that
It was a case of non-exploitative consensual sexual relationship between two consenting adolescents, though consent in view of the age of the victim is immaterial”.
“It is the duty of a male adolescent to respect the aforesaid duties of a young girl or woman and he should train his mind to respect a woman, her self- worth, her dignity and privacy, and her right to autonomy of her body,” the high court had said.
READ ALSO: Consumer Commission Orders Honda to Replace Motorcycle Over Manufacturing Defect
The High Court said it is the duty/obligation of every female adolescent to “protect her right to the integrity of her body; protect her dignity and self-worth; thrive for the overall development of herself transcending gender barriers; control sexual urges and urges, as in the eyes of society, she is the loser when she gives in to enjoy the sexual pleasure of hardly two minutes; protect her right to the autonomy of her body and her privacy.”.
The Apex Court had said in the appeal against conviction that the high court was called upon to adjudicate only on the merits of the appeal and nothing else.
“But we find that the High court has discussed so many issues which were irrelevant. Prima facie, we are of the view that while writing a judgment in such appeal, the judges are not expected to express their personal views. They are not expected to preach,” it had said.
As per the order of the Chief Justice of India, a suo motu writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has been initiated mainly due to sweeping observations and findings recorded by the division bench of the High Court of Calcutta in the impugned judgment,” it said.
During the proceedings, the Supreme Court also addressed concerns regarding the alleged victim’s representation. The court issued notice to the victim, necessitating her presence through legal counsel.
The Apex Court had said in the appeal against conviction that the High Court was called upon to adjudicate only on the merits of the appeal and nothing else.
“But we find that the high court has discussed so many issues which were irrelevant. Prima facie, we are of the view that while writing a judgment in such appeal, the judges are not expected to express their personal views. They are not expected to preach,” it had said.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
