NEW DELHI, April 15 – India’s Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concern over what it called “insensitive” judicial remarks made by judges of the Allahabad High Court in cases involving sexual offences against women and minors, prompting a wider discussion on judicial responsibility in handling such matters.
A bench headed by Justice B.R. Gavai, while hearing a suo motu case, questioned the repeated issuance of controversial observations by the High Court, one of the country’s oldest and largest constitutional courts. “What is happening in this High Court? Now this is another judge from the same High Court saying such things… Why make all these observations?” Justice Gavai asked during the hearing, which was also attended by Justice A.G. Masih.
The remarks come in the wake of two controversial rulings delivered by separate judges of the Allahabad High Court. In one instance, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra concluded that the alleged groping of a minor and the breaking of her pyjama string by two men did not amount to attempted rape, but could only constitute the lesser offence of outraging the modesty of a woman.
The order, dated March 17, has since been stayed by the Supreme Court, which had previously described the ruling as “totally insensitive, inhuman” and “unknown to the tenets of law.” In another case, Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh granted bail to a rape accused while stating that the survivor “invited trouble and was responsible for the same,” drawing further criticism from the apex court.
“Justice should not only be done, but seen to be done. What will the common man perceive from these remarks?” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench, supporting the court’s scrutiny of the High Court’s approach. The apex court adjourned the matter on Tuesday after noting incomplete service of pleadings among parties.
The controversial March 17 order had stemmed from a revision petition filed by the accused, challenging a trial court summons on rape charges. The prosecution has alleged that the accused offered the minor girl a lift on a motorbike, groped her, broke her pyjama string, and attempted to drag her under a culvert before fleeing when passers-by intervened.
A petition filed by the victim’s mother, in conjunction with child rights NGO Just Rights for Children Alliance and represented by senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, argued that the accused acted with clear sexual intent and did not desist voluntarily but fled only due to public intervention.
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court’s conclusions, despite recounting the trauma faced by the minor, displayed “a complete lack of sensitivity.” The court is expected to continue hearing the matter after completion of pleadings in the coming days.
