The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has dominated that holding the fingers of a minor woman and opening of the zip of pants doesn’t fall beneath the purview of ‘sexual assault’ or ‘aggravated sexual assault’ of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The statement was made by a single bench of Justice Pushpa Ganediwala on January 15 whereas passing an order on an attraction filed by a 50-year-old man difficult a classes courtroom’s order convicting him for sexually assaulting and molesting a five-year-old woman.

The convict, Libnus Kujur, was in October 2020 convicted beneath sections 354-A (1)(i) (outraging modesty) and 448 (house-trespass) of the IPC and sections 8 (sexual assault), 10 (aggravated sexual assault) and 12 (sexual harassment) of the POCSO Act. He was sentenced to 5 years in jail.

In her judgement, Justice Ganediwala famous that whereas the prosecution has established that the accused entered the home of the sufferer with an intention to outrage her modesty or sexually harass her, it has not been capable of show the cost of ‘sexual assault’ or ‘aggravated sexual assault’.

Also learn| ‘No sexual assault’ in minor’s groping: Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order

The excessive courtroom famous that the definition of “sexual assault” beneath the POCSO Act says that there must be “physical contact with sexual intent without penetration”.

“The acts of ‘holding the hands of the prosecutrix (victim)’, or ‘opened zip of the pant’ as has been allegedly witnessed by the prosecution witness (mother of the victim), in the opinion of this court, does not fit in the definition of ‘sexual assault’,” Justice Ganediwala stated.

The excessive courtroom additional stated that the info of the current case are usually not enough to repair the legal legal responsibility on the accused (Kujur) for the alleged offence of aggravated sexual assault.

Also learn| SC seeks Centre’s reply on Congress MP’s plea against farm laws

“At the most, the minor offence punishable under section 354-A(1)(i) of the IPC read with section 12 of the POCSO Act is proved against the appellant (Kujur),” the courtroom stated.

The prosecution’s case is that Kujur had on February 12, 2018 entered the home of the sufferer when her mom had gone to work.

When the mom returned from work, she discovered the accused holding the hand of her daughter with the zip of his pants open.

The mom, whereas recording her proof within the decrease courtroom, had stated that her daughter had knowledgeable her that the accused particular person had eliminated his non-public half from the pant and requested the sufferer to come back to mattress for sleeping.

The excessive courtroom quashed Kujur’s conviction beneath sections Eight and 10 of POCSO Act, however upheld his conviction beneath the opposite sections.

The courtroom, nevertheless, stated it was modifying the sentence and famous that Kujur has thus far undergone 5 months in jail.

Also learn| Why comedian Munawar Faruqui was arrested: A timeline

“Considering the nature of the act, which could be established by the prosecution and considering the punishment provided for the aforesaid crimes, in the opinion of this Court, the imprisonment which he has already undergone would serve the purpose,” the courtroom stated.

The courtroom stated the accused shall be let loose if he isn’t required in some other case.

Another judgment handed by Justice Ganediwala this month acquitting a 39-year-old man for groping a minor woman, noting that there was no “skin-to-skin contact with sexual intent” has confronted extreme flak.

The Supreme Court had on Wednesday stayed operation of this order after Attorney General Okay Okay Venugopal talked about the matter submitting that it was a really disturbing conclusion by the Bombay High Court.

This story has been printed from a wire company feed with out modifications to the textual content. Only the headline has been modified.


Follow us on Google News

VNAP News Portal