Supreme Court restores conviction in minor’s rape, overturns Calcutta HC’s order acquitting man

The Supreme Court of India (SC) has today (August 20) restored the conviction of a man who raped a minor girl after he was acquitted by the Calcutta High Court (HC), which in its judgement asked adolescent girls to "control their sexual urges", ANI reported.

The apex court took up the case for hearing today (August 20) suo moto. In December last year, the SC criticised the verdict and termed some observations made by the high court as “highly objectionable and completely unwarranted”, as per a PTI report.

"Prima facie, the said observations are completely in violation of the rights of the adolescents guaranteed under Article 21(right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India," the SC noted.

‘Judges Not Expected to Preach’

Taking up a writ petition on its own, the SC took cognisance of some observations made by a division bench of the Calcutta HC and said that judges are not expected to "preach" while writing judgements.

In its suo moto order on December 8, the apex court said that the high court's observations were in violation of the young girl's 'Right to Life', as guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. Besides the suo moto petition, the West Bengal government had also filed an appeal against the HC's verdict delivered on October 18, 2023.

"Prima facie, the said observations are completely in violation of the rights of the adolescents guaranteed under Article 21(right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India," the SC noted.

Later, hearing the matter on January 4, the SC observed that certain paragraphs in the high court's verdict were "problematic" and writing such judgements was "absolutely wrong".

What Calcutta HC Said

In its October judgement, the HC bench observed that female adolescents should "control sexual urges" as in the "eyes of the society, she is the loser when she gives in to enjoy the sexual pleasure of hardly two minutes".

In its verdict, the high court had acquitted the man, stating that it was a case of "non-exploitative consensual sexual relationship between two consenting adolescents, though consent in view of the age of the victim is immaterial".

The high court had said it is the duty/obligation of every female adolescent to "protect her right to the integrity of her body; protect her dignity and self-worth; thrive for the overall development of herself transcending gender barriers; control sexual urge/urges as in the eyes of the society she is the loser when she gives in to enjoy the sexual pleasure of hardly two minutes; protect her right to autonomy of her body and her privacy".

"It is the duty of a male adolescent to respect the aforesaid duties of a young girl or woman, and he should train his mind to respect a woman, her self-worth, her dignity and privacy, and her right to autonomy of her body," the high court had said.

The court was hearing an appeal by the accused, who was awarded a 20-year sentence for sexual assault by a lower court. The high court had acquitted the man.

The accused was in September 2022 convicted of offences under Sections 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Suo Moto Writ Petition Initiated

The apex court had said in the appeal against conviction, the high court was called upon to adjudicate only on the merits of the appeal and nothing else.

"But we find that the high court has discussed so many issues which were irrelevant. Prima facie, we are of the view that while writing a judgment in such an appeal, the judges are not expected to express their personal views. They are not expected to preach," it had said.

"As per the order of the Chief Justice of India, suo motu writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has been initiated mainly due to sweeping observations/findings recorded by the division bench of the high court of Calcutta in the impugned judgment," it had said.

(With inputs from Agencies)