NEWS: Bombay HC says Touching Cheeks without Sexual Intent Wouldn’t Attract Sexual Assault

The Bombay High Court while granting bail to an accused

NEWS: Bombay HC says Touching Cheeks without Sexual Intent Wouldn’t Attract Sexual Assault

The Bombay High Court while granting bail to an accused booked under various offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POSCO), observed that touching cheeks without sexual intent would not attract the offence of ‘sexual assault’, as defined under Section 7 of the POCSO Act.

Mohammad Ahmed Ulla v. The State of Maharashtra

The Bench of Justice Sandeep K Shinde opined that no material on record suggests that the accused allegedly touched the cheeks of the victim with sexual intent.

In this case, the applicant runs a chicken shop wherein an 8 year old victim and her mother was present, the victim’s mother lodged an FIR under Sections 354, of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 8, 9(m), 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2021, stating that the applicant has touched the cheek of her daughter inside the shop. Whereafter, the applicant was arrested, an investigation was conducted and a final report had been filed.

The court granted bail to him, ordering his release on executing PR bond for the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in like sum.

Read Order

Join Us as a Campus Ambassador for Legal Wires and Lex Live!
Join Us as a Campus Ambassador for Legal Wires and Lex Live!
Join Us as a Campus Ambassador for Legal Wires & Lex Live! Lead initiatives, build Legal AI Societies, and connect with peers and professionals. https://forms.gle/sFNBHhiquZSGemqw9
"No Suits to Be Registered and No Orders Passed Until Further Directions": Supreme Court Intervenes in Places of Worship Act Case
"No Suits to Be Registered and No Orders Passed Until Further Directions": Supreme Court Intervenes in Places of Worship Act Case
The Supreme Court halts the registration of new suits against places of worship and bars survey orders in pending cases, while hearing petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act, 1991.
"Mere Harassment Not Enough for Suicide Abetment Conviction": Supreme Court Clarifies Legal Standards
"Mere Harassment Not Enough for Suicide Abetment Conviction": Supreme Court Clarifies Legal Standards
The Supreme Court rules that harassment alone isn't enough to convict someone of abetment to suicide. It requires evidence of direct action or incitement by the accused.
Or
Powered by Lit Law
New Chat
Sources

Ask Lit Law