Thursday, 18 August, 2022
HomeIndiaThis is the reason why BHC argues groping a child is not...

This is the reason why BHC argues groping a child is not sexual assault under POCSO

According to Justice Ganediwala, sexual assault on a minor would involve an act committed with sexual intent that involves physical contact without penetration.

Text Size:

New Delhi: The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has held that the act of groping a child’s breast, without any skin-to-skin contact and sexual intent, is not sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. This special law was constituted to prohibit crimes against children.

A single-judge bench held by Justice Pushpa V. Ganediwala said that touching a minor girl’s breast without removing the top wouldn’t be considered as sexual assault, but would be regarded as outraging the modesty of a woman under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Also read: The Maharashtra Shakti bill on crimes against women, children & why it’s called ‘draconian’


Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism


  1. sexual assault – “……or does any other Act with sexual intent which
    involves physical contact without penetration…”

    He made physical contact! He took her by the hand, forced her to his private quarters (where he later locked her – talk about intent!!) and physically INTENTIONALLY touched her breasts, albeit over her clothes.

    This judge is a 51 yo female. Is she sadly inclined to bow to the power of male control still?

    The name ‘Outrage of a Woman’s Modesty’ is so powerful (because it is what is being done). Why then is it that the punishment of said outrage not nearly balanced with the weight of the title?

    One would figure outraging a Woman’s Modesty to be an horrific act; the likes of which no one would wish upon their mother, wife, sister or daughter. Why is that act punishable by 1 year?

    I am sick for the child. Sick for the young girls and women of a wonderful country that needs to right its laws on humanity. Equal rights for all humans. Our world should be outraged for the sake of all women’s modesty and show them in judicial and social reform.

    • That judge has perhaps lost her mind, accused can use gloves and will use condoms to prevent skin to skin contact and further will say there wasn’t any skin to skin contact, this judge has low mentality being woman and could be corrupt as well to make such judgement or she isn’t capable of being a judge of the high court, lower court’s judgement in this case is absolutely correct and should had been sustained by justice ganediwala.

Comments are closed.

Most Popular