Accidental touch without sexual intent does not qualify as sexual assault under the POCSO Act
Madras High Court Overturns Conviction in POCSO Case, Citing Lack of Sexual Intent
Accidental Touch Not Sexual Assault, Rules Court; Appellant Acquitted in Case Involving Alleged Breast Touch of Minor Madras High Court has set aside the conviction of K. Chithambaram, who had been sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The case, which revolved around an alleged incident of sexual assault through an accidental touch, was dismissed due to lack of evidence proving sexual intent.
The appellant, K. Chithambaram, was accused of touching the breast of a minor girl under the guise of attempting to play with a baby she was carrying. The incident reportedly took place in a grocery shop owned by Chithambaram during a power cut, which resulted in dim lighting conditions.
Justice M. Nirmal Kumar, presiding over the appeal, meticulously examined the circumstances surrounding the alleged assault. The court noted that the prosecution failed to establish the foundational facts required to invoke the presumptions of guilt under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act. The judgment highlighted that sexual assault necessitates sexual intent, which must be inferred from the surrounding circumstances-a factor absent in this case.
The court observed that Chithambaram, an elderly man with grandchildren, had no previous complaints against him and was merely attempting to engage with the baby when the inadvertent contact occurred. The victim's testimony and the statements recorded during the investigation were deemed insufficient to prove any malicious intent.
Furthermore, the court identified procedural lapses in the prosecution's case. The complaint was penned by an individual named Basheer, who was not called upon to testify, rendering the complaint hearsay and inadmissible. Additionally, the victim's father, who lodged the complaint, admitted to relying on second-hand information from his wife, who was also not examined in court.
Referencing the Supreme Court's ruling in Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, the High Court underscored the necessity for clear and convincing foundational facts before applying presumptions of guilt under the POCSO Act. The absence of such evidence led to the conclusion that the conviction was unjustified.
The judgment has garnered attention for its emphasis on the importance of intent in cases of alleged sexual assault, particularly under the POCSO Act. Legal experts suggest it could set a precedent for future cases where accidental contact is misconstrued as a criminal act.
With the acquittal, Chithambaram is now free of charges, and the bail bond executed stands canceled. The fine imposed by the trial court is to be refunded.
This ruling serves as a reminder of the judicial system's role in safeguarding the rights of individuals against wrongful convictions while maintaining the integrity of laws designed to protect vulnerable populations.
K.Chithambaram v. State, (Madras) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2780035
