LOADING...
SC reverses verdict that grabbing minor's breasts wasn't rape attempt 
The court found the high court's interpretation of criminal law principles to be erroneous

SC reverses verdict that grabbing minor's breasts wasn't rape attempt 

Feb 18, 2026
02:27 pm

What's the story

The Supreme Court has set aside a controversial Allahabad High Court judgment that ruled grabbing a minor girl's breasts and loosening her pajama string was not an attempt to rape but merely "preparation." The apex court found the high court's interpretation of criminal law principles to be erroneous. It reinstated the original summons issued by the Special Judge under Section 376 IPC read with Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Legal disagreement

We cannot agree with high court's finding: Supreme Court

A three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice NV Anjaria heard the case. The bench strongly disagreed with the high court's view that such acts were only "preparation" and not an attempt to commit rape. They said, "The facts alleged being so, we cannot agree with the finding of the High Court that the allegations only amount to preparation." It said the accused did not carry out the act due to third-party interference.

Case details

What was the Allahabad High Court ruling?

The case was based on a complaint by a minor girl's mother. The Special Judge under Section 156(3) CrPC had issued summons to two accused under Section 376 IPC read with Section 18 of POCSO Act. However, the Allahabad High Court modified these summons, ruling that the allegations did not constitute an attempt to commit rape and instead charged them under lesser offenses under Section 354B IPC read with Sections 9 and 10 of POCSO Act.

Advertisement

Legal clarification

Supreme Court restores trial court's summoning order

The Supreme Court restored the trial court's summoning order under Section 376 IPC and clarified that the distinction between preparation and attempt was misunderstood by the high court. The bench emphasized that an attempt goes beyond mere preparation and involves the execution of mens rea (criminal intent) after preparation. They noted that intervention by third-party witnesses stopped further crime, indicating a "pre-determined" intent to commit rape.

Advertisement

Trial proceedings

What high court said 

The prosecution alleges that Pawan and Akash grabbed the 11-year-old victim's breasts. One of them then broke the string on her pajama and attempted to drag her beneath a culvert. However, before they could proceed any further, passersby intervened. "This fact is not sufficient to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on victim as apart from these facts no other act is attributed to them," the high court said in its ruling.

Advertisement