Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Allahabad HC Order Reducing Attempted Rape Charges
In a major development, the Supreme Court of India has initiated a suo motu case to review a controversial judgment by the Allahabad High Court, which held that acts involving grabbing a child’s breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert did not constitute rape or an attempt to rape. The High Court had instead reduced the charges to lesser offences.
The case, titled “In Re: Order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 1449/2024 and Ancillary Issues,” will be heard by a Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih.
Case Background
The Allahabad High Court had passed the contentious order on March 17, 2025, while modifying the charges framed against two accused. Initially, the trial court had summoned them under the following provisions:
- Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) – relating to rape, and
- Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act – punishment for attempt to commit an offence.
However, the High Court altered the charges and directed that the accused be tried under:
- Section 354-B IPC – assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe, and
- Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act – aggravated sexual assault.
Allahabad High Court’s Observations
In its order, the Allahabad High Court, while reducing the charges, stated:
“…the allegation against accused Pawan and Akash is that they grabbed the breasts of the victim and Akash tried to bring down lower garment of the victim and for that purpose they had broken string of her lower garments and tried to drag her beneath the culvert, but due to intervention of witnesses they left the victim and fled away from the place of incident. This fact is not sufficient to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on the victim as apart from these facts no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim.”
Details of the Incident
According to the prosecution, the accused, Pawan and Akash, had allegedly grabbed the breasts of an 11-year-old girl, broken the string of her pyjama, and attempted to drag her beneath a culvert. However, the accused fled the scene after passers-by intervened.
The trial court had initially framed charges under Section 376 IPC and Section 18 of the POCSO Act, finding it a case of attempted rape or attempted penetrative sexual assault. The accused subsequently challenged the summoning order before the High Court.
Arguments Presented Before the High Court
- Accused’s Argument: The accused contended that, even if the victim’s allegations were accepted at face value, the case did not meet the threshold for attempted rape and could, at most, fall under the scope of Section 354 IPC (assault to outrage modesty) and Section 354-B IPC (assault with intent to disrobe).
- Complainant’s Argument: The complainant’s counsel argued that at the stage of framing charges, a trial court need not analyze the evidence in detail but only determine if a prima facie case exists to proceed with the trial.
Supreme Court’s Response
Interestingly, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and Prasanna B Varale had, on March 24, declined to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the High Court’s ruling. However, a separate Bench, led by Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih, has now taken suo motu cognizance of the order, signaling deeper judicial scrutiny of the Allahabad High Court’s decision and its interpretation of attempted rape.
Next Steps and Broader Implications
The suo motu case, which will be heard in the coming weeks, is expected to examine not just the correctness of the High Court’s ruling but also broader questions regarding the interpretation of laws meant to protect children from sexual crimes.
This case has sparked public outrage and raised concerns about the protection of child victims, the scope of attempted rape under Indian law, and the judiciary’s role in ensuring that justice is delivered in cases involving sexual violence against minors.
