Allahabad High Court Rules Grabbing Private Parts and Breaking Drawstring Not Attempt to Rape

Allahabad High Court’s verdict on attempt to rape case raises legal debates.

• Court Differentiates Between ‘Preparation’ and ‘Actual Attempt’ in Sexual Assault Case
• Grabbing Private Parts and Breaking the Drawstring is Not an Attempt to Rape: High Court

In a shocking verdict, the Allahabad High Court has ruled that Grabbing a minor girl’s private parts, breaking the drawstring of her pajama, and attempting to drag her do not constitute rape or an attempt to rape.

The court distinguished between “preparation” and “actual attempt” to commit a crime and ordered modifications to the serious charges framed by the lower court.

Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra stated in the ruling, “To establish the charge of attempt to rape, it must be proven that the act progressed beyond mere preparation. There is a distinction between preparation and an actual attempt.”

Supreme Court’s Stand: Touching a Child’s Private Parts with Sexual Intent is ‘Sexual Assault’ Under POCSO

On November 19, 2021, the Supreme Court overturned a Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench ruling, stating that touching a child’s private parts or any act involving physical contact with sexual intent qualifies as ‘sexual assault’ under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. The intent, rather than direct skin-to-skin contact, is the key factor in determining the crime.

In this case, the accused, Akash, allegedly tried to drag the victim under a culvert and broke the drawstring of her pajama. However, witnesses did not confirm that her clothes were removed.There was also no allegation that the accused attempted penetrative sex.

Previous Bombay High Court Ruling Overturned by Supreme Court

In January 2021, Bombay High Court Additional Judge Pushpa Ganediwala had acquitted an accused of sexual assault, reasoning that touching a minor’s private parts without skin-to-skin contact does not constitute an offense under POCSO. However, the Supreme Court later overturned this ruling.

In this case, a lower court had summoned Pawan and Akash under Section 376 of the IPC (Rape) and Section 18 of the POCSO Act. The victim’s family had filed a complaint stating that the accused attempted to rape the minor in 2021 under the pretense of offering her a lift but fled when bystanders arrived.