Case Brief: Satish Ragde v. State of Maharashtra

Case Name: Satish Ragde v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2020

Bench:   Pushpa v. Gandiwala

Petitioner: Satish Ragde

Respondent: The state of Maharashtra through police Station officer, Gittikhadan, Nagpur.

Date of Judgment: 19^th January, 2021

Introduction

This case deals with the appeal which was filed by the accused against the decision of a special court before the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court and order dated 5/2/2020. In this case, the accused wrongfully constrained a girl aged 12 years old in order to rape her and touched her private body parts and he had tried to remove her salwar.

He had been convicted for the offence under Sections 354, 342 and 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO act 2012 which told about the sexual assault of a child with Rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and a fine. The accused had been convicted for the offence of the outraging modesty of women. That’s why he moved to the High court and challenged the decision of the special court.

Facts of Case in Satish Ragde v. State of Maharashtra

The prosecutrix a girl aged 12 years went to bring guava but didn’t come back for a long time then her mother try to search for her and at last when she reached the accused home and ask about her daughter then he refused about this.

When the mother searching her daughter on the first floor she found her in a locked room and daughter was crying. Her daughter tells her that the man offered her guava and took her into his home and then he was frightened and he pressed her breast and when she try to shout then he try to remove her Salwar.

All this seen defined by her daughter and her mother immediately filed an FIR against the accused. And the Police start an investigation and filed the charge sheet before the Special Court of Nagpur and then special court convicted him of Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 years with fine 500.

Issues in Satish Ragde v. State of Maharashtra

• Whether the attempt to remove Salwar comes under the sexual harassment act under section 7 and punishable under section 8 of POCSO ACT?
• Whether accused be considered guilty of sexual harassment act without having skin-to-skin contact under Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO ACT?
• Whether the accused be considered guilty under Section 7 and 8 of POCSO ACT?

Contention of Appellant

• The accused argued against the prosecutrix girl’s aged 12 years of mental ability and contend that she may also lack mental intelligence.
• The accused also argued against the mother’s testimony and contend that she was not herself a witness and she was giving testimony based on hearsay.
• The accused also argued that pressing of breasts does not cover under Section 7 and 8 of POCSO ACT.
• The accused also contended that Sexual Harassment without skin-to-skin contact does not come under Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO ACT.

Contention of Respondent

• The Learned Counsel again read the definition of Sexual offence under Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO ACT.
• The learned counsel also stated the testimony of three witnesses.
• The minor’s consideration and mother’s testimony on the point of the incident reveals that the accused touched the prosecutor’s body parts.
• The concept of “ejusdem generis” also applies here argued by the respondent side.

Judgement

The Court mentioned that Skin to skin contact is necessary for the offence of sexual harassment under the POCSO ACT and the groping is unknown by the accused which can not cover under the section of the POCSO ACT. That’s why the accused is not guilty under Sections 7 and 8 of this act. He is only liable for offence under Sections 353 and342 of the Indian Penal Code with rigorous imprisonment of 1 year and with a fine of Rs. 500.

The court also considered the definition of sexual assault and tells that severe proof is necessary for this and court mentioned that the Police Filed FIR based on testimony given by the mother and the daughter because of an immediate event happening and define daughter to her mother ad after all this court took the decision in favor of appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The courts go through the all provision and sections of sexual assault and harassment with women and children and also analyze the testimony given by the mother and daughter and their neighbor.

Court also tell about Section 353 of IPC which tells Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty and section 342 of IPC which tells Whoever wrongfully confines any person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

Also told about Section 363 of IPC which tells Punishment for kidnapping. —Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from lawful guardianship shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to a fine.

Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO ACT also cover this case.

Conclusion

At last, after going through all the concepts the Court must not have gone into the factual meaning of the statutes and should have interpreted the statute keeping in mind the purpose of the legislation. The judgment of the Bombay High Court was later set aside by the Supreme Court.

This judgment was stayed by the SC and set aside the judgment. It held that the main constituent for sexual assault is sexual intent and not skin-to-skin contact. The Supreme Court has held that direct skin-to-skin contact is not necessary to constitute sexual assault under section 7. The Supreme Court held that direct make contact is not essential and indirect touch would also quantity to sexual assault under POCSO.

This article has been contributed by Sunaina, a student at Panjab University.