ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA versus SATISH AND ANOTHER

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA versus SATISH AND ANOTHER

Section 7 of the POCSO Act must be interpreted so that 'touch' of specified sexual parts and 'any other act' involving 'physical contact' with sexual intent are offences; 'physical contact' is not confined to 'skin to skin' contact and may include contact through clothing or via objects; sexual intent is the crucial element and statutory presumptions under ss.29 and 30 may be applied; accordingly the High Court erred in narrowing s.7 and the trial court convictions are restored.

Parties
Appellant: Attorney General for India; Appellant: National Commission for Women; Appellant: State of Maharashtra; Accused/respondent: Satish; Accused/respondent: Libnus Fransis Kujur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Disposal on Appeal to Supreme Court
Outcome
High Court judgments quashed and trial court convictions and sentences restored
Legal Topics
POCSO Act S.7 Sexual Assault, Interpretation of 'touch' and 'physical Contact', Statutory Presumptions S.29 and S.30, Rule of Lenity, Ejusdem Generis, Sentencing, Procedural: Certified Copies
Criminal Law Statutory Interpretation Child Protection Law POCSO Act S.7 Sexual Assault Interpretation of 'touch' and 'physical Contact' Statutory Presumptions S.29 and S.30 Rule of Lenity Ejusdem Generis +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General for India

Appellant

National Commission for Women

Appellant

State of Maharashtra

Appellant

Satish

Accused/respondent

Libnus Fransis Kujur

Accused/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Disposal on Appeal to Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words 'touch' and 'physical contact' in s.7 POCSO require 'skin to skin' contact to constitute sexual assault
  2. 2 Whether acts described in the cases (pressing breast through clothing, attempting to remove salwar, unzipping and showing penis, holding hands and moving frock) fall within s.7 and aggravated sexual assault under s.9(m) read with s.10
  3. 3 Whether the Rule of Lenity or ejusdem generis limit the scope of s.7

Ratio Decidendi

Section 7 of the POCSO Act must be interpreted so that 'touch' of specified sexual parts and 'any other act' involving 'physical contact' with sexual intent are offences; 'physical contact' is not confined to 'skin to skin' contact and may include contact through clothing or via objects; sexual intent is the crucial element and statutory presumptions under ss.29 and 30 may be applied; accordingly the High Court erred in narrowing s.7 and the trial court convictions are restored.

Court Disposition

High Court judgments quashed and trial court convictions and sentences restored

Orders

  • Judgments and orders dated 19.01.2021 and 15.01.2021 of Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench quashed and set aside
  • Judgments and orders dated 05.02.2020 (Special Child Protection Case No.28/2017) and 05.10.2020 (POCSO Case No.07/2019) restored