The Allahabad High Court has considered the crime of severe sexual harassment, not rape but not to break the pulse of breast and breaking the pulse of pajama. This comment has been made by Justice Ram Manohar Mishra for the case registered at Patiali police station in Kasganj, in which Akash and two other accused have been accepted by the criminal revision petition. The court also clarified that the difference between the effort of rape and the preparation of the crime should be understood correctly.

The court ordered the accused to run a case under Section 376 (rape) instead of Section 376 (rape) under Section 354-B and Section 9/10 (serious sexual attack) of the Poxo Act. The court clarified that the facts of the allegations do not prove rape attempt.

What is the whole matter?

The incident took place in 2021, when a court in Kasganj called two accused, Pawan and Akash, to allege a minor girl to rape a case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 18 of the Poxo Act.

The High Court has directed that the accused should be prosecuted under Section 354-B IPC (using an attack or use of criminal force) under Section 9/10 (severe sexual attack) of the Poxo Act with a minor charge of the intention of nude or criminal force.

Challenged trial court order

The trial court issued a summons order considering it a case of rape and sexual harassment under the Paxo Act. The accused had filed a revision petition in the High Court challenging this order, in which it was argued that the matter does not come under Section 376 IPC (rape) on the basis of complaint and it can only come under Section 354 (B) IPC and Paxo Act, which the court has also accepted.

What did the court say?

The court partially acknowledged the criminal revision petition and said that the allegations against the accused Pawan and Akash and the facts of the case do not make the crime of the attempt to rape in this case. According to the prosecution, the accused Pawan and Akash caught the 11 -year -old victim's breasts and Akash broke the pulse of her pajamas and tried to pull her under the culvert, but due to the intervention of the passers/witnesses, she left the spot leaving the accused. He did not commit the crime of rape.

The court said that there is no such evidence from which the accused were in the intention of raping the victim. It further said that it is clear from the statements recorded that the accused himself got upset after breaking the slogan of lower clothes.