Overview

• The court set aside the 2017 Sessions Court conviction and three-year sentence under IPC section 354A and POCSO section 8 for molestation of a minor.
• Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke’s bench held that sexual intent must be demonstrated through conduct like inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing or indecent gestures.
• The judges found no evidence of suggestive body language, repeated behaviour or attempts to advance physical contact beyond holding the girl’s hand.
• While accepting the victim’s age as 17 via her birth certificate, the ruling clarified that minor status alone cannot trigger POCSO provisions without proof of intent and physical contact.
• The decision sets a precedent for requiring clear indicia of sexual intent in child protection cases and directs lower courts to apply a stricter evidentiary threshold.