Kolkata6 minutes ago
- Copy link
The trial court convicted the accused under POCSO and IPC sections.
After the Allahabad High Court, now the Calcutta High Court has said that trying to touch the breast of a minor girl in a state of intoxication, there is no attempt to rape under the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act.
However, the court considered it a serious sexual harassment attempt but granted bail to the accused. The case was heard by the Division Bench (bench) of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Biswaroop Chaudhary.
In fact, the trial court convicted the accused under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 448/376 (2) (C)/511 of the IPC. The court sentenced him to 12 years in jail and a fine of Rs 50,000.
The accused had filed a petition against this. Along with this, the accused had said that he had sought bail by arguing that he was jailed for more than two years.
About a month ago, the Allahabad High Court also gave a similar decision. The court had said that there is no attempt to rape or rape a minor’s breast, break the pulse of his pajamas or drag down the culvert.
Court agreed- not evidence of penetration The accused had said in his petition that he was implicated in a false case. Evidence does not support the allegations of rape attempt. Even though the victims, investigating doctors and other witnesses have accepted the evidence as true, but the allegations are not proved.
The lawyer of the accused argued that without paynetation, a crime cannot be considered under Section 376 of the IPC. More and more POSCO Act can become a case of serious sexual harassment under Section 10. The punishment fixed for this is 5 to 7 years.
The lawyer said that the accused has completed a large part of the sentence, so he should get bail. On this, the court found that there are no signs of penetration in the evidence given by the victim. On this, the court admitted that an attempt to catch breasts could be a case of serious sexual harassment rather than tried to rape.
Allahabad High Court has also given a similar decision Is A woman from Kasganj in Uttar Pradesh lodged a complaint in the court on January 12, 2022. It was alleged that on November 10, 2021, she went to Devrani’s house in Patiali, Kasganj with her 14 -year -old daughter. While returning to their homes the same evening, Pawan, Akash and Ashok, who lived in the village, met on the way.
Pawan asked the daughter to sit on a bike and leave the house. The woman, while trusting, made the daughter sit on the bike. On the way Pawan and Akash grabbed the girl’s breasts. Akash broke the pulse of his pajamas while trying to pull him under the culvert.
Hearing the screams of the girl, some people reached the spot. The accused threatened them and escaped by showing indigenous guns. When the victim’s mother went to the accused, the father of the accused abused and threatened. The police also did not register an FIR, so they moved to the court.
The High Court said in the judgment- the accused caught the victim’s breasts, broke the pajamas and tried to pull it under the culvert, but they ran away when some people arrived. This does not make a case of rape attempt.
Three questions were raised in this case
- Does catch a girl’s breasts, break the cord of pajamas and try to pull her fall under the category of rape attempt?
- Did the Special Judge use proper judicial discretion while issuing summons?
- The accused party argued that it was a case of rivalry. Earlier, Akash’s mother lodged an FIR for tampering against the relatives of the complainant on 17 October 2021.
Accused On behalf of the lawyer Ajay Kumar Vasistha argued that the sections imposed on the accused are not correct. At the same time, on behalf of the complainant, advocate Indra Kumar Singh and the state government’s lawyer argued that it is necessary to prove the prima facie case to issue summons and not to have a detailed hearing.