The Delhi high court has said that the act of touching, pressing lips, or lying down next to a minor girl in the absence of sexual intent will not amount to aggravated sexual assault under the Protection of children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act. However, such acts will amount to outraging a woman’s modesty since the same violates their dignity, the court stated.
“The act of touching and pressing lips or lying down next to the victim, though may result in violation of a woman’s dignity and lead to outraging of her modesty, but absent any overt or inferred sexual intent, the said acts would fall short of meeting the legal threshold required to sustain a charge under section 10 of Pocso Act,” a bench of justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said in a February 24 ruling, which was released this week.
The matter arose from a plea filed by a 35-year-old man against city court’s July 30, 2024 order of framing charges against him under Indian Penal Code section 354 (outraging a woman’s modesty) and Pocso section 10 (aggravated sexual assault) for allegedly touching and pressing the lips of his 12-year-old niece, before and sleeping next to her.
In his petition before the high court, the man asserted that pressing and touching the lips did not amount to outraging a woman’s modesty. The plea, argued by advocate Amrita Jaiswal, submitted that the same in the absence of sexual intent would also not constitute an offence under Posco. It went on to add that the trial court had failed to assign reasons for reaching the satisfaction for framing the charges.
However, the Delhi Police represented by additional public prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar submitted that the allegations against the man were serious in nature, and that the victim in her statement had categorically stated that she used to feel uncomfortable due to the acts of the accused.
After hearing both sides, justice Sharma in a 17-page order partially set aside the order by discharging the man for the offence under the Pocso provisions, asserting that the trial court failed to record reasons justifying the framing of charges.
Justice Sharma also stressed on the importance of city court passing reasoned orders, asserting that courts, while arriving at a conclusion, must assign reasons when the same have the potential of impacting an individual’s liberty.
“When a person is at risk of incarceration for a significant period, judicial orders should not be passed in a mechanical manner. The trial courts are expected, at the very least, to provide some reasoning, even if not elaborate, to demonstrate application of mind to the facts and arguments placed before them,” the judge said.
Leave a Reply