Case Study: Satish S/o Bandu Ragde v. State of Maharashtra

“In absence of any specific detail as to whether the

Case Study: Satish S/o Bandu Ragde v. State of Maharashtra

“In absence of any specific detail as to whether the top was removed or not, ‘pressing of breast’ would not fall within the definition of ‘sexual assault’ as defined under Section 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.”

Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 161 of 2020

Date of Judgement: 19th January, 2021

Bench: Pushpa V. Ganediwala (J)

Facts:

On 14th December, 2016, FIR was lodged against appellant by victim’s mother claiming appellant took her daughter (aged 12 years) in his house and pressed her breast and attempted to remove her salwar. When she searched for her daughter, she was found crying in the first floor of accused house whose door was locked.

Decision of the Special Court:

Court found the accused guilty of the crimes under Section 354, 363, 342 of Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Accused was sentenced for rigorous imprisonment and fine. However, court acquitted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 309 Indian Penal Code.

Decision of the Bombay High Court:

Appeal was partly allowed by acquitting the appellant under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and convicted him under Section 354 and Section 342 of IPC.

Key law points discussed in the case:

  • Whether the ‘pressing of breast’ and ‘attempt to remove salwar’ could fall within the definition of ‘sexual assault’ as defined under Section 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012?

No

The words ‘any other act’ in Section 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 means act which are similar to the acts specifically mentioned on the basis of the principle of ‘ejusdem generis’. In the present case, there is no direct contact i.e., skin to skin with sexual intent without penetration.

Considering the nature of punishment under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, court opined that stricter proof and serious allegations are required. In absence of any specific detail as to whether the top was removed or not, ‘pressing of breast’ would not fall within the definition of ‘sexual assault’ as defined under Section 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. But this would certainly fall under Section 354 Indian Penal Code.

Anish Sinha
Case Study: Rejanish K.V. v. K. Deepa
The Supreme Court in Rejanish K.V. v. K. Deepa (2025) held that judicial officers with seven years of prior advocacy are eligible for direct recruitment as District Judges under Article 233(2), overruling Dheeraj Mor and affirming equality in eligibility.
Nishant Singh Rawat
Case Study: Sri Hansraj Koley v. The Secretary, Labour Department and Others
In Sri Hansraj Koley v. The Secretary, Labour Department (WPA 10043 of 2025), Calcutta HC held guest faculty not a "workman" under Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, as they are not regularly employed and receive honorarium, not wages, dismissing the writ petition.
Harish Khan
Case Study: Philip Morris v. Uruguay
The Philip Morris v. Uruguay case reaffirmed states' rights to regulate in the public interest, particularly for health measures. The ICSID tribunal ruled that Uruguay's tobacco regulations did not constitute expropriation or unfair treatment, setting a key precedent.
Or
Powered by Lit Law
New Chat
Sources
No Sources Available
Ask AI