Keypoints:
- SC stays release of accused whose sentence was cut to 1 year by Bombay HC on grounds that there wasn’t skin contact with victim. Attorney General said verdict set ‘dangerous precedent’.
- Bombay High Court judgment interpreted sexual assault as only “skin-to-skin” contact with sexual intent under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
The HC order had held that groping a minor girl without touching her skin did not amount to sexual assault under POCSO Act. On Wednesday, the SC stayed a disturbing decision of the Bombay HC which said that groping a minor girl without touching her skin did not amount to sexual assault under Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The AG said, “The order is very disturbing and is likely to set a dangerous precedent.” He requested the court to take cognizance as he was in the process of filing a petition against the order.
The AG said, “It is an unprecedented order as it will mean that if a cloth is touched, no case under Section 8 is made out. This court must take notice of the judgement.”
Justice Pushpa Ganediwala of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, in a judgment passed on January 19, held that there must be “skin to skin contact with sexual intent” for an act to be considered sexual assault. She said in her verdict that mere groping will not fall under the definition of sexual assault.
“Imagine explaining to a young girl in India that if a man forcibly touches her under her clothes it’s assault but if he does so over her top or pants, it’s not,” Pranadhika says.
On January 19, a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court’s Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was “skin-to-skin” contact.The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault.
“Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the January 19 judgment of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people,” the petition said.
