SC Steps In After Allahabad HC Dilutes Attempt-to-Rape Charge in Child Assault Case

The Supreme Court on Monday strongly disapproved an Allahabad High Court ruling that held the acts of grabbing a minor girl’s breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to pull down her lower garment were insufficient to infer an attempt to rape.

The Court, which had taken suo motu cognisance of the March 17 order, said the judgment could not stand and required immediate correction.

The Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made it clear that the High Court’s conclusions would be set aside and that the criminal trial must proceed unhindered. “We will set aside the HC order and let the trial continue,” the CJI said while issuing interim directions.


Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing as amicus curiae, drew the court’s attention to a series of troubling judicial observations from different courts, including an Allahabad HC remark suggesting that an incident occurring at night amounted to an “invitation”, and similar comments from the Calcutta and Rajasthan High Courts. Gupta also highlighted a recent incident where a minor was allegedly harassed even during an in-camera session trial.

The Bench said it was open to issuing guidelines to curb prejudicial and insensitive observations in sexual-offence cases. “These comments can have a chilling effect on victims. Sometimes such modalities are also adopted to pressure them into withdrawing the complaint,” the CJI observed.

The Court noted that the accused had been served twice through the investigating agency but had not appeared.

Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka informed the Bench that the accused had been attending trial court hearings and was fully aware of the proceedings before the Supreme Court.

Directing the SHO to relay information about the next hearing, the bench clarified that the matter would not be adjourned for service again. The Supreme Court also stayed the operation of the High Court’s order “so that no prejudice is caused to the victim”.

The Bench further directed that if the trial court summons the accused, it must frame charges under Sections 376 and 511 of the IPC along with the appropriate provisions of the POCSO Act, and continue the proceedings without being influenced by any observations from the Supreme Court at this stage.

Previously, on April 15, the Court had taken strong exception to the observations made by the Allahabad High Court, in a case where it had granted bail to a man accused of rape while noting that the victim, being an adult and educated, had "invited trouble" upon herself.

While taking note of the sensitivity required in such cases, a bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih had emphasised that judges need to be cautious while dealing with cases involving sexual violence against women.

Notably, Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh of the Allahabad High Court while allowing bail to the accused remarked that even if the woman’s allegations were accepted as true, it could still be concluded that she was also responsible for the incident. In view of this, Justice Gavai had remarked, “If one wants to grant bail, it should be granted. But why make observations like she invited all this trouble and so on?”

On 26 March, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Union government and the Uttar Pradesh government in the suo motu proceedings while staying the recent judgment of the Allahabad High Court.

The ruling sparked widespread criticism. It was delivered on March 17, 2025, by a single-judge bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra while modifying a trial court’s summoning order against two accused, Pawan and Akash. According to the prosecution case, the accused had allegedly assaulted an 11-year-old girl, with Akash breaking the string of her lower garment and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert. However, the assault was interrupted by passersby, causing the accused to flee.

Case Title: In Re: Order Dated 17.03.2025 Passed By The High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad In Criminal Revision No. 1449/2024 And Ancillary Issues

Hearing Date: December 8, 2025

Bench: CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi 

Tags: