Supreme Court Stays Allahabad HC Ruling on Assault of Minor, Calls It ‘Insensitivity’

The Supreme Court on Wednesday put a hold on the Allahabad High Court's ruling, which said that grabbing a minor girl’s breasts, breaking her pyjama string, and trying to drag her under a culvert did not count as an attempt to rape. The High Court had instead classified the act as 'aggravated sexual assault' under the POCSO Act, which carries a lesser punishment. A Supreme Court bench, led by Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih, took up the case on its own after widespread public outrage. The judges strongly disagreed with the High Court’s decision, calling it "shocking." "We are at pains to say that some of the observations made in the impugned judgment, particularly paras 21, 24, and 26, depict a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the author of the judgment" the bench observed in the order. The Supreme Court noted that the Allahabad High Court’s ruling was not given hastily but after nearly four months of deliberation. This meant the judge had carefully considered the case before delivering the verdict. However, the Supreme Court found the observations completely against legal principles and showed a lack of sensitivity and humanity, leading it to put the ruling on hold. The court has asked for responses from the Union of India, the Uttar Pradesh government, and the parties involved. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta called the judgment "shocking." The case came to the Supreme Court’s attention after Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta, representing the NGO ‘We the Women of India’, sent a letter requesting intervention. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused persons, Pawan and Akash, grabbed the breasts of the 11-year-old victim and one of them, namely Akash, broke the string of her pyjama and tried to drag her beneath the culvert. Finding it to be a case of attempt to rape or attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault within the purview of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, the concerned trial court invoked Section 376 with Section 18 (attempt to commit an offence) of the POCSO Act and issued summoning order under these sections. However, the High Court instead directed that the accused be tried under the minor charge of Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) read with Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault). The order created a huge controversy, with several members of the public criticising it. In this case, the High Court drew a distinction between preparation and attempt. “The allegations levelled against the accused Pawan and Akash and facts of the case hardly constitute an offence of attempt to rape in the case. 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,” a bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra observed as it partly allowed the criminal revision plea filed by 3 accused. It should be noted that the Supreme Court bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and PB Varale had dismissed an Article 32 writ petition challenging the order on grounds of locus recently. Case : 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 | SMW(Crl) No. 1/2025