The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over a recent Patna High Court judgment that held that pressing a woman's chest and attempting to remove her salwar did not constitute the offence of attempted rape. The matter was brought to the attention of the apex court during proceedings concerning judicial sensitivity in sexual offence cases.
The controversy stems from a judgment delivered by the Patna High Court in Himanshu Kr. Pathak v. State of Bihar, where the Court held that allegations of attempting to remove a woman's salwar and pressing her chest, without evidence of penetration or an unequivocal act directed towards rape, would amount to outraging modesty under Section 354 IPC rather than attempted rape. Consequently, the conviction for attempt to rape was set aside.
The ruling attracted widespread criticism from legal experts and women's rights advocates, who argued that the judgment adopted an unduly narrow interpretation of what constitutes an attempt to commit rape.
During a hearing before the Supreme Court, senior advocates highlighted the Patna High Court's observations. The Bench took note of the judgment and questioned whether such conduct could be viewed lightly. The Court stressed that acts involving forcible disrobing, physical molestation, and sexual aggression against women must be approached with appropriate judicial sensitivity.
The Supreme Court further directed that recommendations and reports prepared by the National Judicial Academy concerning judicial sensitivity in sexual offence cases be made widely accessible through the websites of the Supreme Court and all High Courts. The objective is to strengthen gender-sensitive adjudication and ensure consistency in the handling of sexual offence matters across courts.
The development comes against the backdrop of growing judicial scrutiny of decisions involving sexual crimes and reflects the Supreme Court's continuing efforts to ensure that courts adopt a victim-centric approach while interpreting offences relating to sexual violence.
While the Patna High Court drew a distinction between outraging modesty and attempted rape based on the facts before it, the Supreme Court's observations indicate a broader concern regarding the manner in which courts assess intent, conduct, and the gravity of sexual offences.
The matter has reignited debate on the legal threshold for establishing an attempt to rape and the need for judicial reasoning that adequately reflects the realities of sexual violence faced by women.