Controversial case of sexual abuse: Bombay High Court had said: skin-to-skin contact without sexual abuse is not, Supreme Court rejected it

The Supreme Court has set aside a Bombay High Court order that held that grasping the breast of a minor by a cloth would not amount to sexual harassment. Justice Pushpa Ganediwala of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, while referring to the POCSO Act, said that if skin-to-skin contact is not done under this law, then it will not be called sexual harassment.

A bench of Supreme Court Justices UU Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and Bela Trivedi observed that narrowing down the meaning of ‘touch’ to ‘skin-to-skin’ would lead to a very narrow and ludicrous interpretation of the POCSO Act. This will defeat the very purpose of this law, which we implemented to protect children from sexual harassment.

Court should not interpret the law according to its own
The court said that touching the child with the wrong intention of wearing clothes or any other clothes is also covered under the POCSO Act. The court should not try to decipher the meaning of simple words. Such narrow and conservative interpretations would defeat the purpose of making this law, which we cannot allow. On January 27, the Supreme Court had stayed the High Court’s order in this case, in which the accused were acquitted.

39 year old accused molested 12 year old girl
The case is of Nagpur. The case was filed on behalf of a 16-year-old girl living there. He was 12 years old and the accused was 39 years old at the time of the incident. According to the victim, in December 2016, accused Satish had taken her to his house on the pretext of giving her food items. Tried to touch and undress her breast. The sessions court had sentenced him to three years under the POCSO Act and one year under section 354 of the IPC in this case. These two sentences were to run concurrently.

HC’s woman judge changed the verdict
The matter reached the Bombay High Court. Justice Pushpa Ganediwala of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, in her order on January 12, had said that there was no evidence of sexual abuse from a 12-year-old girl to prove that she was toppled or had physical contact. Therefore, it cannot be classified as a sex offence.
Justice Ganediwala, while amending the judgment of the Sessions Court, acquitted the convict from the punishment awarded under the POCSO Act, while upholding the one-year imprisonment awarded under Section 354 of the IPC.

What is POCSO Act?
Under the POCSO Act, sexually assaulting a child with an unlawful intent, touching the chest, genitalia, or doing any act that involves physical contact.