Recently, the Supreme Court has clarified that merely touching the private parts of a minor does not amount to the offence of rape under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or penetrative sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Instead, such conduct constitutes sexual assault under the POCSO Act and outraging the modesty of a woman under the IPC.
The case arose when Laxman Jangde was accused of sexually assaulting a girl under 12 years of age. FIR and statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. alleged that he touched the victim’s private parts while simultaneously touching his own, with no penetration involved. The trial court convicted him under Section 376AB IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to 20 year’s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.50,000, which was upheld by the Chhattisgarh High Court. Jangde then appealed to the Apex Court, arguing that the act did not amount to rape or penetrative sexual assault, but at most constituted sexual assault under Section 354 IPC and Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act.
The Division Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted, “A plain reading of the evidence and other materials on record reveal that the offence made out from such allegation do not satisfy the ingredients of either Section 375 of the IPC or Section 3(c) of the POCSO Act. Thus, to that extent, the conviction cannot be sustained.”
The Court highlighted that the assumption of penetrative sexual assault by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court was unsupported by the medical report, the victim’s statements, or her mother’s testimony. The consistent allegation, the Court observed, was that the accused touched the private parts of the victim and at the same time, the appellant touching his private organs.
While the Court set aside the conviction under Section 376AB IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, it held that “What has come right from the beginning by way of complaint/FIR, subsequent deposition of the victim as also, the other witnesses, the so-called act of the appellant will come under the purview of Section 354 of the IPC and Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act.”
Accordingly, the conviction was modified, and the appellant was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 354 IPC and seven years under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, with both sentences running concurrently. The fine of Rs.50,000 remains, to be paid to the victim as compensation within two months.
Case Title: Laxman Jangde Vs. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer
Case No: SLP(Crl.) No.10377 of 2025
Coram: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Advocate for Appellant: Sr. Adv. Ranji Thomas, Advs. Mohan Raj A, Kshirja Agarwal, AOR Charulata Chaudhary
Advocate for Respondent: Advs. Prerna Dhall, Rajnandani Kumari, Kapil Katare, Ambuj Swaroop, Minakshi Pandey
Picture Source :