New DelhiA few moments ago
- Copy link
The Supreme Court on Tuesday took notice of the Allahabad High Court on Tuesday on the decision of the Allahabad High Court on Tuesday.
The bench of Justice BR Gawai and Augustine George Christ will hear the case on Wednesday. Earlier, the Supreme Court refused to hear a petition filed on this case. The petition demanded the removal of the disputed part of the judgment.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear after opposition from legal experts, politicians and experts from different regions on this decision.
First know what the Allahabad High Court said A girl’s personal parts, breaking the pulse of her pajamas and forcibly trying to pull her under the culvert, do not cause a case of rape or ‘Atampt to rape’. On Monday, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of Allahabad High Court changed the currents on 2 accused. Accepted a criminal revision petition filed against 3 accused.
Justice said- not allegations of attempting penetrative sex In his order on March 17, Justice Ram Manohar Mishra said, the prosecution has to prove that the matter had only proceeded from the preparation to accuse him of the rape attempt. Between preparations and real efforts, the inside is in excess of determination. In this case, the accused Akash is accused of trying to pull the victim under the culvert and broke her pulse. But the witnesses did not say that the victim’s clothes got off. Nor is it alleged that the accused tried for penetrating sex with the victim.
4. Lakhimpur case registered a FIRIR II. In fact, a woman from Kasganj 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. She was returning home in the evening the same day. On the way, Pawan, Akash and Ashok, who live in the village, were found.
Pawan asked the daughter to sit on her bike and leave the house. The mother trusted him on the bike, trusting him. But on the way, Pawan and Akash caught the girl’s private part. Akash tried to draw her under the culvert and broke the string of her pajamas.
Hearing the screams of the girl, Satish and brown passing through the tractor reached the spot. The accused threatened both of them by showing indigenous pistol and escaped. Subsequently, when the victim’s mother went to the house of the accused Pawan’s father Ashok, she abused and threatened. When the police did not register an FIR, they moved to the court. The accused took refuge in the High Court against the orders of the lower court.
Sexual harassment on the pretext of giving lift A woman from Kasganj 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. She was returning home in the evening the same day. On the way, Pawan, Akash and Ashok, who live in the village, were found.
Pawan asked the daughter to sit on her bike and leave the house. The mother trusted him on the bike, trusting him. But on the way, Pawan and Akash caught the girl’s private part. Akash tried to draw her under the culvert and broke the string of her pajamas.
Hearing the screams of the girl, Satish and brown passing through the tractor reached the spot. The accused threatened both of them by showing indigenous pistol and escaped. Subsequently, when the victim’s mother went to the house of the accused Pawan’s father Ashok, she abused and threatened. When the police did not register an FIR, they moved to the court.
The accused took refuge in the High Court against the orders of the lower court.
The judge raised three questions in this case
- Does catch a girl’s private organs, 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 the case was a rage. Because earlier Akash’s mother had lodged an FIR for tampering against the relatives of the complainant on 17 October 2021.
On behalf of the accused, advocate Ajay Kumar Vashistha 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.
Supreme Court overturned a similar decision of Bombay High Court On November 19, 2021, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court. It was said that touching the sexual organs of a child or any act related to physical contact with sexual intentions would be considered a sexual attack under Section 7 of the Poxo Act. It has an important intention, not skin contact with the skin.
Bombay High Court Additional Judge Pushpa Gaynadiwala acquitted an accused of sexual harassment in January 2021, saying that a minor victim’s private organs could not be considered a crime in poxo without skin to skin contact. However, this decision was later overturned by the Supreme Court.
———————————–
Read this news also today’s Excellener: Catching a private part of the girl, breaking the pulse of salwar is not an attempt to rape.
A girl’s personal parts, breaking the pulse of her pajamas and forcibly trying to pull her under the culvert, do not cause a case of rape or ‘Atampt to rape’. On Monday, the Allahabad High Court gave this verdict and changed the sections on two accused. What is the whole matter, why did the court say there is a difference between the attempt and preparation of rape and what will be the impact of this decision; Read full news …