In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court stated that actions such as grabbing a minor’s breasts or snapping a pyjama string do not amount to rape or attempted rape. However, these actions can be classified as aggravated sexual assault, a lesser offense.
In a controversial order that has sparked widespread criticism and calls for Supreme Court intervention, the Allahabad High Court has made a distinction between “the preparation stage” and “actual attempt” in rape cases.
In a 2021 incident in Kasganj, Uttar Pradesh, an 11-year-old girl was subjected to a sexual assault, according to prosecution reports. Two men, identified as Pawan and Akash, are accused of accosting the minor and her mother, who were walking at the time. The men allegedly offered the girl a ride on their motorcycle, subsequently grabbing her breasts, tearing her clothing, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert.
When passers-by heard the girl’s screams and rushed to her aid, the two men fled the scene.
Pawan and Akash were initially summoned by a trial court on charges of rape and under the POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act. However, after challenging the summons before the Allahabad High Court, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra on Monday revised the charges to include assault, “use of criminal force with intent to disrobe,” and aggravated sexual assault under POCSO.
“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,” the order said.
Justice Mishra observed that there was no evidence on record to suggest that the men had intended to commit rape.
“The specific allegation against Akash is that he tried to drag the victim beneath the culvert and broke the string of her pyjami. It is also not stated by witnesses that due to this act of the accused the victim got naked or got undressed. There is no allegation that accused tried to commit penetrative sexual assault against the victim,” Justice Mishra observed in his order.
The counsel for the accused men argued that at the stage of framing charges, the trial court is not required to thoroughly examine and evaluate the evidence and material gathered during the investigation. They contended that at this stage, the court’s role is simply to determine whether there is sufficient ground to proceed with a trial.
