Bombay High Court¡¯s Judgement Over Sexual Assault Of A Minor Sparks Massive Outrage
A recent judgement passed by the Bombay High Court has snowballed into a controversy. Groping a minors breast without skin to skin contact cannot be termed as sexual assault as defined under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences POCSO Act. The judgement was termed insensitive and many called out the woman judge over the observation.
A recent judgement passed by the Bombay High Court has snowballed into a controversy.
Groping a minor's breast without "skin to skin contact" cannot be termed as sexual assault as defined under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Court had observed.
File Photo
Justice Pushpa Ganediwala of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, in a judgement passed on January 19, the detailed copy of which was made available now, 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.
Offence can't be termed sexual assault in absence of skin-to-skin contact
Justice Ganediwala modified the order of a sessions court, which had sentenced a 39-year-old man to three years of imprisonment for sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl.
As per the prosecution and the minor victim's testimony in court, in December 2016, the accused, one Satish, had taken the girl to his house in Nagpur on the pretext of giving her something to eat.
Once there, he gripped her breast and attempted to remove her clothes, Justice Ganediwala recorded in her verdict.
However, since he groped her without removing her clothes, the offence cannot be termed as sexual assault and, instead, constitutes the offence of outraging a woman's modesty under IPC section 354, the high court held.
The judgement was termed "insensitive" and many called out the woman judge over the observation:
I want to respectfully ask the Bombay high court if I slap someone with a glove, does that not count as assault? If I say ¡°tere ton fuddu banda nai dekhya¡± with a mask, that doesn¡¯t as a nasty comment?
¡ª radical (@MooseJattana) January 24, 2021
Bombay High court,
¡ª ?? kay ? ? ?? ?? ? (?) (@THICCMINY00NGI) January 24, 2021
it wont be considered as physical harm right? i can assure you there wont be any skin to skin contact !! pic.twitter.com/VdOPyFWbP8
Good morning to everyone except the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court
¡ª Gaurav (@s0vietonion) January 24, 2021
ok then bombay high court, if i smack one of your judges across the face w a glove don¡¯t come @ me
¡ª britney¡¯s bitch (@jasmeerakohlii) January 25, 2021
Tw// sexual assault
¡ª V ?| ????? ???? (@Fangirling_Mood) January 25, 2021
The new statement passed by bombay high court is so fucked up. pic.twitter.com/jFputWPy0R
Think of the larger message it sends to the young girls out there- it is bad if someone touches you without your consent, but it is not as serious if they don't try to get under your clothes. My two cents on Bombay High Court¡¯s judgment today. #POCSO https://t.co/JZY7GdXT7W
¡ª Mani Chander (@ManiChander11) January 24, 2021
While section 354 entails a minimum sentence of imprisonment for one year, sexual assault under the POCSO Act entails a minimum imprisonment of three years.
