The Supreme Court bench of Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih has stayed the widely debated order of the Allahabad High Court, where it was held that acts of grabbing a minor victim's breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert do not constitute the offence of rape or attempt to rape.

The court initiated suo motu proceedings in response to a letter submitted by Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta, the founder of the NGO 'We the Women of India'.

The bench deemed the order as shocking and expressed deep concern over certain observations in the impugned judgment, stating that they demonstrated a complete lack of sensitivity.

Further, the court emphasized that the judgment was not rendered impulsively but was delivered after being reserved for nearly four months. Noting that the observations were "totally unknown to the tenets of law and depict total insenstivity and inhuman approach" the bench found it necessary to stay them.

The Court also issued notice to the Union of India, the State of Uttar Pradesh, and the parties involved before the High Court

The controversy began on March 17, 2025, when the bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of Allahabad High Court sparked major nationwide outrage after observing that grabbing girl’s breast, breaking the string of pyjama and dragging her beneath the culvert is not enough to charge the accused for charges of ‘attempt to rape.’

The High Court modified the charges against the two accused, who were initially set to face trial under Section 376 of the IPC (Punishment for Rape) and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act (Punishment for attempt to commit an offence).

Instead, the Court directed that they be tried for a minor offence under Section 354-B of the IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe), along with Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault).

The court highlighted that “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”.

Ultimately observed that “In the present case, the allegation against accused Pawan and Akash is that they grabbed the breasts of the victim and Akash tried to bring down lower garment of the victim and for that purpose they had broken 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 victim as apart from these facts no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim”.

Notably, such suo motu proceedings came right after a Supreme Court Bench, comprising Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice Prasanna B Varale, declined to entertain a petition challenging the Allahabad High Court order on March 24.

Case Title: 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

Source: NEWS