The Science of Jet Lag: Know How to Recover Faster
Introduction – Case details
In a court case filed in 2021, before the Kasganj Court, two men Pawan and Aakash were accused of rape u/s 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and u/s 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for the alleged rape of a minor girl (victim). Luckily this act was stopped by passers-by who intervened, but the accused fled from the scene. The case filed by the girl’s family mentioned that under the pretext of giving her a lift, the duo attempted to rape her. The lower court charged the accused as guilty.
Plea by accused
However, the accused approached the Allahabad High Court challenging their summons of the lower court stating that they were not guilty to be tried u/s 376 of the IPC. They said that, if at all proven guilty, they would be tried as per Section 354 and 354(b) of the IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe), and relevant provisions of the POCSO Act and not rape.
Surprising Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of the Allahabad High Court agreed to this and ordered the lower court to modify the charges against the accused.
No sufficient grounds for rape
Not rape, was what the judge ruled, in his order dated 17 March 2025, as the facts of the case were insufficient grounds and the court did not find enough evidence to charge the accused of rape.
The Court stated that to prove the attempted rape or rape, the Prosecution should prove that the accused had gone beyond the prelude i.e. grabbing the breasts of the victim, breaking her pyjama strings, and attempting to drag her below the culvert. This was his definition of rape, as given by the Court, which stated that the “preparation stage” and the “actual attempt” has a vast difference. To quote his words “The difference between preparation and actual attempt to commit an offence consists chiefly in the greater degree of determination.”
Reduced charges
The Court stated that the accusation levied against the accused Akash, who tried to drag the minor victim below the culvert and break the string of her pyjamas, did not amount to rape and was insufficient to charge him for attempted rape. The Court further said that there were no eyewitnesses to prove that the aforesaid acts of Akash against the minor victim resulted in her getting naked or undressed and that there was no penetrative sexual act against the victim. Hence there was no rape.
The Court ordered that the accused should not be charged with rape, but u/s Section 354 (b) of the IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) and Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault).
Supreme Court Stays Allahabad High Court’s Remarks
The Supreme Court has stayed the controversial judgment of the Allahabad High Court, which had downgraded charges in a POCSO case. Terming the High Court’s observations as \”insensitive and inhuman,\” the Supreme Court expressed shock at the reasoning used to dismiss the attempted rape charge. The apex court has also issued notices to the Union of India and the State of Uttar Pradesh, ensuring further scrutiny of the ruling.
Opinion
Is our legal system fair in this case? If this attempt was not enough, will the Court wait for the actual ‘penetrative sexual act’ before punishing the accused? Should this act of the accused not be treated seriously? Doesn’t this protect offenders who will get a free hand to molest / eve-tease minors, girls, and women? Hiding the accused behind such lesser charges will boost their egos and they will get away with molestation every time. How were the accused aware of the specific charges that they wanted to be tried against? How was the Court justified in agreeing with the accused? These are some vital questions that come to mind.
\”The Supreme Court\’s stay signals that such rulings will not go unquestioned. However, it remains to be seen whether this case will lead to stronger judicial sensitivity and accountability in matters of sexual violence
Inputs from various media sources
