Immaterial whether the breasts of a girl were developed or not, any sexual intent amounts to sexual assault, Justice Bibek Chaudhuri of the Calcutta High Court rules. This ruling comes in the case of Rohit Pal vs The State Of West Bengal.
The case of Rohit Pal dates back to 2017. The mother of the 13-year-old, filed a written complaint against Rohit Pal, on May 31st, 2017, on the grounds of sexual abuse. The accused allegedly kissed the 13-year-old girl and touched her breasts, in absence of her parents. He reportedly fled the scene as soon as the minor cried out trying to free herself. A police case was then filed against Rohit Pal. He has been convicted under Section 448/354 of the Indian Penal Code ( For House-trespassing and outraging a woman's modesty) by the trial court and Section 8 of the POSCO Act
Sexual Intent Towards Children Amounts to Sexual Assault
The Calcutta High Court in the case of Rohit Pal vs The State of West Bengal has upheld the trial court's orders. The accused has been convicted under Section 8 of the POSCO Act. The high court ruled that the accused was guilty after observing that the sexual intent was clear. The accused claimed during the proceedings, that the question of touching the girl's breasts does not arise at all as her breasts hadn't even developed as the medical officer of the case had stated.
Justice Bibek Chaudhuri considering all the facts of the case ruled against the accused stating, "It is absolutely immaterial whether breasts of a 13-year-old girl were developed or not. The specific part of the body of a girl of 13 years of age shall be termed as breast... even if her breasts are not developed due to certain medical grounds."
He also added, "In the instant case it is stated by the victim girl that the accused touched different parts of her body and also kissed her. Why should a grown-up man who is not related to the victim girl kiss her entering her house when his guardians were not present in the house. The sexual intent of a person can be gathered from the specific contact of the accused and the surrounding circumstances. There cannot be any direct evidence of sexual intent. In the instant case entering into the house of the de facto complainant in the absence of her and her husband, touching the body of the victim girl, and kissing her shows that the accused had sexual intent and, therefore, the act involves physical contact by the accused with the victim and he was rightly convicted under Section 8 of the POCSO Act."
The court has thus clearly stated that "touching the vagina, penis, anus or breasts of a child or making the child touch the same of the offender with sexual intent does not only constitute the offense of sexual assault but whoever does any other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact without penetration amounts to sexual assault." While the appellant was represented by Advocates Kallol Mondal, Krishan Ray, Souvik Das, and Anamitra Banerjee. Advocates Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ranabir Roy Chowdhury, Faria Hossain, and Sandip Chakraborty appeared on behalf of the State of West Bengal. Advocate Ayan Bhattacharjee was the amicus curiae(an impartial adviser to a court of law)
Suggested Reading: Rape Doesn’t Need Removal Of Clothes, Intent Alone Is Enough: Meghalaya HC Rules
/shethepeople/media/agency_attachments/iUYfaBbcMozaYLoGnoov.png)
Follow Us/shethepeople/media/post_banners/HDDQAOHU3TVcQZx5pxr3.jpg)