The Supreme Court of India has overturned a controversial ruling by the Allahabad High Court, restoring attempt to rape charges against two accused in a case involving a minor girl. The High Court had previously determined that actions taken against the victim – grabbing her breasts and breaking the string of her pyjama – constituted “preparation” for a crime, but not an actual “attempt” to commit rape.
Restoration of Charges
The Supreme Court disagreed with the Allahabad High Court’s assessment, stating that the actions demonstrated a clear intent to commit rape. The Court has reinstated the original summons issued by the Special Judge, POCSO, Kasganj, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The Court noted that the accused only ceased their actions due to the intervention of third parties. This intervention, the Court reasoned, underscored the “pre-determined intent” of the accused to commit rape.
Distinction Between ‘Preparation’ and ‘Attempt’
The Supreme Court found the Allahabad High Court’s application of legal principles to be “patently erroneous.” The Court referenced State of Madhya Pradesh v. Mahendra alias Golu (2022), authored by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, to explain that an “attempt” follows “preparation” when the intent to commit a crime begins to be executed.
The three-judge bench delivering the judgment comprised Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice N.V. Anjaria. The Court initiated the case *suo motu* following concerns raised about the original High Court ruling.
What Happens Next
With the charges restored, the case will proceed to trial before the Special Judge, POCSO, Kasganj, based on the original summons. It is possible the trial court will now proceed with the case under Section 376 IPC and Section 18 of the POCSO Act. The Supreme Court has clarified that its observations should not be interpreted as an opinion on the guilt of the accused.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the original ruling by the Allahabad High Court?
The Allahabad High Court had altered the charges against the accused, stating that their actions – grabbing the victim’s breasts and breaking the string of her pyjama – did not amount to an attempt to commit rape, but only to “preparation.”
Who delivered the Supreme Court’s judgment?
The judgment was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice N.V. Anjaria.
What is the significance of the Supreme Court’s decision?
The Supreme Court’s decision clarifies the legal understanding of “attempt” versus “preparation” in cases of sexual assault and reinforces the importance of considering the intent of the accused.
How might this ruling influence future cases involving similar allegations?
