Allahabad High Court’s Ruling: Acts of Molestation Not Enough to Charge Attempted Rape:

The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that certain acts of molestation, such as grabbing the breasts of a victim and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert, do not meet the criteria to charge a perpetrator with attempted rape. The court made a significant distinction between what constitutes the “preparation stage” and an “actual attempt” to commit rape.

In this case, Pawan and Akash were accused of molesting an 11-year-old girl in Kasganj, Uttar Pradesh, in 2021. The two men allegedly grabbed her breasts, broke the string of her pyjama, and attempted to drag her beneath a culvert. The assault was interrupted by passers-by, and the accused fled the scene. The incident began when the accused offered the victim a lift.

Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, who presided over the single bench, partly allowed a revision petition filed by the accused, challenging the order of the lower court which had directed them to face trial under Section 376 (attempted rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act.

The court explained that for a charge of attempted rape to hold, the prosecution must prove that the act had progressed beyond mere preparation. "The difference between preparation and actual attempt to commit an offence consists chiefly in the greater degree of determination," the bench stated. The judge clarified that the evidence presented did not indicate an intent to commit penetrative sexual assault.

The counsel for one of the respondents argued that during the charge framing stage, the court should not assess the evidence in detail. The court noted that no witnesses had testified to the victim being undressed or having been subjected to penetrative sexual assault. Additionally, the judge observed that the actions of the accused, such as breaking the pyjama string and attempting to drag the victim, were insufficient to establish an attempt to rape.

This ruling draws attention to the importance of distinguishing between preparatory actions and actual attempts in criminal cases involving sexual offenses, and highlights the need for sufficient evidence to substantiate charges of attempted rape.