A disturbing verdict

The ruling by the Allahabad High Court which downgraded charges against two men accused of sexually assaulting an 11-year-old girl is deeply troubling. By holding that grabbing a minor’s breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert do not amount to an attempt to rape, the court has sent an alarming message about how sexual violence is viewed under the law. In its order, the court distinguished between “preparation” and “actual attempt” to rape, claiming that the prosecution failed to establish that the accused had crossed the threshold into an actual attempt.

Advertisement

This legalistic interpretation ignores the terrifying reality of sexual violence. If forcefully restraining a child, violating her bodily autonomy and attempting to isolate her are not enough to establish intent, then what is? The perpetrators’ inability to complete their crime due to external intervention should not dilute the gravity of their intent. The ruling also contradicts the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, which was specifically enacted to address crimes against minors with a stricter legal framework. The court’s failure to fully recognise the gravity of the crime under the POCSO Act raises serious concerns about its approach to child protection laws.

The ruling not only weakens the fight against child sexual abuse but also sets a dangerous precedent. Survivors already struggle for justice in a system where legal technicalities often favour the accused. This verdict risks normalising predatory behaviour by reducing its legal consequences. Furthermore, it reflects a deeper problem within judicial reasoning — one that often fails to understand the psychological and physical trauma of sexual violence survivors. This case demands urgent intervention from the Supreme Court. The judiciary must remember that laws exist to protect the vulnerable, not to provide loopholes for the guilty.