The Supreme Court has expressed concern over recurring judicial approaches in sexual offence cases after the Patna High Court ruled that removing a woman’s salwar and pressing her breasts did not constitute an attempt to rape. Stressing the need for judicial sensitivity, the apex court has directed all courts and police authorities to follow nationally prescribed guidelines while dealing with such cases.
he Supreme Court has raised serious concerns over judicial handling of sexual offence cases following a Patna High Court judgment that held removing a woman’s salwar and pressing her breasts did not amount to an attempt to rape. The apex court underscored the need for greater judicial sensitivity and directed that the National Judicial Academy Committee’s report on adjudicating sexual offence cases be uploaded on the websites of the Supreme Court and all High Courts.
The report was prepared in the suo motu proceedings initiated after the Allahabad High Court’s controversial March 17, 2025 order, which had observed that pulling a minor girl’s pyjama string and grabbing her breasts did not constitute an attempt to rape. The Supreme Court had subsequently overturned that view and ordered sensitisation of judges dealing with such offences.
During the hearing, senior advocate Shobha Gupta informed the bench that similar judicial reasoning continued to surface, citing the Patna High Court’s July 9 judgment. Justice V. Mohan questioned whether the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling and directions on judicial sensitisation had been cited before the Patna High Court.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant remarked that judges have an independent duty to research and remain updated with binding precedents, observing that such lapses should not occur in judicial decision-making.
The Supreme Court further directed that all courts adhere to the expressions and principles contained in the judicial handbook on sexual offence cases. It also instructed State governments to issue directions to all police stations to follow the handbook while registering FIRs and filing charge sheets. A detailed reasoned judgment on the issue is also expected to be uploaded.
The controversy arose from a Patna High Court decision that set aside a trial court’s conviction of an accused for attempt to rape in a 2008 case. The High Court held that although the accused had allegedly confined the woman inside a photography studio, attempted to remove her salwar and pressed her chest, those acts constituted the offence of outraging a woman’s modesty under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code rather than an attempt to rape.
The High Court observed that the prosecution had failed to establish the essential ingredients of an attempt to rape, noting the absence of medical evidence indicating penetration or any overt act unequivocally amounting to an attempt to commit rape. It also pointed out that the investigating officer had not been examined during the trial and that the prosecution case primarily relied on the testimonies of the survivor and her parents.
Consequently, while acquitting the accused of the charge of attempt to rape, the High Court held that the evidence clearly established the offence of using criminal force with the intention of outraging the survivor’s modesty by confining her, attempting to remove her salwar and physically molesting her. The Supreme Court’s latest observations are expected to reinforce uniform judicial standards and greater sensitivity in the adjudication of sexual offence cases.
We strive to make a lasting impact on India’s policy and planning landscape through fair, unbiased, and incisive research based journalism.
But we can’t do it alone.
Together, we can create a better India, where policies are fair, planning is unbiased, and the truth prevails. Your contribution matters, and we shall be immensely grateful for your support.