Not sexual assault if there is no 'skin to skin' contact HC

    Mumbai, Jan 24 (PTI) Groping a minor's breast without
"skin to skin contact" cannot be termed as sexual assault as
defined under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
(POCSO) Act, the Bombay High Court has said.
    Justice Pushpa Ganediwala of the Nagpur bench of the
Bombay High Court, in a judgement passed on January 19, the
detailed copy of which was made available now, held that there
must be "skin to skin contact with sexual intent" for an act
to be considered sexual assault.
    She said in her verdict that mere groping will not
fall under the definition of sexual assault.
    Justice Ganediwala modified the order of a sessions
court, which had sentenced a 39-year-old man to three years of
imprisonment for sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl.
    As per the prosecution and the minor victim's
testimony in court, in December 2016, the accused, one Satish,
had taken the girl to his house in Nagpur on the pretext of
giving her something to eat.
    Once there, he gripped her breast and attempted to
remove her clothes, Justice Ganediwala recorded in her
verdict.
    However, since he groped her without removing her
clothes, the offence cannot be termed as sexual assault and,
instead, constitutes the offence of outraging a woman's
modesty under IPC section 354, the high court held.
    While section 354 entails a minimum sentence of
imprisonment for one year, sexual assault under the POCSO Act
entails a minimum imprisonment of three years.
    The sessions court had sentenced him to three years of
imprisonment for the offences under the POCSO Act and under
IPC section 354. The sentences were to run concurrently. The
high court, however, acquitted him under the POCSO Act while
upholding his conviction under IPC section 354.
    "Considering the stringent nature of punishment
provided for the offence (under POCSO), in the opinion of this
court, stricter proof and serious allegations are required,"
HC said.
    "The act of pressing of breast of the child aged 12
years, in the absence of any specific detail as to whether the
top was removed or whether he inserted his hand inside the top
and pressed her breast, would not fall in the definition of
sexual assault," it said.
    Justice Ganediwala further said in her verdict that
"the act of pressing breast can be a criminal force to a
woman/ girl with the intention to outrage her modesty".
    The POCSO Act defines sexual assault as when someone
"with sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast
of the child or makes the child touch the vagina, penis, anus
or breast of such person or any other person, or does any
other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact
without penetration is said to commit sexual assault".
    The court, in its verdict, held that this "physical
contact" mentioned in the definition of sexual assault must be
"skin to skin" or direct physical contact.
    "Admittedly, it is not the case of the prosecution
that the appellant removed her top and pressed her breast. As
such, there is no direct physical contact i.e. skin to skin
with sexual intent without penetration," the HC said. PTI AYA
BNM
NP NP

(This story has not been edited by THE WEEK and is auto-generated from PTI)