In a controversial decision, the Allahabad High Court has ruled that grabbing the breasts of an 11-year-old girl and snapping her pyjama string does not constitute an attempt to rape. This ruling, delivered on March 17, 2025, has ignited widespread outrage and debate across India, raising critical questions about the legal boundaries of sexual violence and the protection of minors.
The Case
The incident took place in Kasganj, Uttar Pradesh, where two men, identified as Pawan and Akash, allegedly assaulted an 11-year-old girl. Reports state that the accused grabbed the victim’s breasts, snapped the string of her pyjama, and attempted to drag her beneath a culvert. Initially, the prosecution charged them under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for rape and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for attempting to commit an offense. However, the Allahabad High Court stepped in, modifying the charges to assault with intent to disrobe (Section 354-B IPC) and aggravated sexual assault under the POCSO Act (Sections 9/10).
The Court’s Reasoning
The High Court based its decision on a careful interpretation of the evidence. It noted that there was “no material on record to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on the victim.” While recognizing the seriousness of the actions, the court ruled that they did not meet the legal threshold for an attempt to rape under Indian law. In India, an attempt to rape requires clear evidence of specific intent to commit the act itself, beyond mere preparatory actions or sexual assault. The court concluded that the evidence supported charges of assault with intent to disrobe and aggravated sexual assault, but not an attempt to rape, and reclassified the offense accordingly.
Public Reaction and Broader Implications
The ruling has drawn sharp criticism. Union Minister for Women and Child Development, Annapurna Devi, denounced the decision, stating, “I am completely against this decision and the Supreme Court should take serious note of it.” She warned of its potential negative societal impact. Legal experts and social media users have echoed this sentiment, arguing that the ruling downplays the severity of sexual assault and risks setting a harmful precedent. The case has fueled debates about judicial interpretations of intent in sexual violence cases and sparked calls for stronger legal protections for victims, particularly minors. This decision underscores the challenges of proving intent in sexual assault cases and highlights the need for continued scrutiny of judicial approaches to such sensitive issues.
[Read Order]