India saw two significant but contrasting judicial views – one from the Supreme Court and the other from the Chhattisgarh High Court – both interpreting a woman’s bodily integrity and the legal parameters that define rape or attempt to rape.
On one hand, the apex court set aside the controversial Allahabad High Court ruling that grabbing a minor’s breasts does not amount to rape or attempt to rape. On the other, the Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that ejaculation without penetration would constitute an attempt to rape, and not rape.
These rulings underscore how India’s higher courts shape the judiciary’s views on women and their rights and understanding of sexual offences.
Supreme Court on Allahabad HC’s ruling
On March 17, 2025, the Allahabad High Court was hearing a case of Akash and Pawan, who allegedly grabbed the breast of an 11-year-old minor, broke the string of her pyjama and attempted to drag her inside a culvert. The child was rescued after passersby heard her screams. A case was registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
A trial court invoked Section 376 (rape) along with Section 18 of the POCSO Act. The case went to the Allahabad High Court, where Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra ruled that there was no material on record to suggest the actions of the accused, Pawan and Akash, were attributed to rape or an intent to rape.
With this, the High Court altered the charges under Section 354B of the IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe), along with Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault).
The High Court’s ruling drew widespread condemnation, prompting the Supreme Court to take a suo motu cognisance of the order and stay it on March 26, 2025.
On February 10, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and asked the National Judicial Academy (NJA) to constitute an expert committee to prepare guidelines that infuse sensitivity and compassion into judicial processes in cases involving sexual offences and other vulnerable victims.
“The guidelines, we expect, will not be loaded with heavy, complicated expressions borne from foreign languages and jurisdictions,” the top court said, asking for the report submission within three months.
Chhattisgarh High Court’s definition of rape
The Chhattisgarh High Court, on February 16, ruled that ejaculation from the penis without penetration constitutes an attempt to commit rape and not rape.
The case pertained to a woman who alleged that in 2004, the accused had committed sexual intercourse against her will. During cross-examination, the victim stated that the accused held his penis above her vagina, but did not penetrate her.
In 2005, the trial court awarded the accused seven years’ imprisonment. The case reached the High Court, where Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas modified the earlier judgment, stating, “According to the medical examination report produced before the bench, the victim’s hymen was intact. Redness in the vulva, the presence of a whitish discharge and the survivor’s complaint of pain were also recorded.”
“Even slight penetration is enough to constitute rape, but the report notes the possibility of partial penetration.”
Justice Vyas also pointed out inconsistencies in the victim’s statements. “Initially, she said there was penetration. Later, she said that the accused kept his penis over her vagina for about 10 minutes without penetrating. Since the medical report did not give a definite opinion on rape, the Court held that the charge of rape was not fully established,” the bench said, and dismissed the case as an attempt to commit rape.
It added that “indecent assault is often magnified into attempts at rape.”
The imprisonment was reduced from seven years to three years and six months.
The two High Court rulings clearly downplay the legal distinction between rape and the attempt to rape. It also highlights that even after producing strong evidence, including medical reports, victims and survivors remain heavily dependent on judicial interpretation.
| | 
