NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday warned judges to refrain from making unsuitable comments in cases concerning sexual violence against women .
Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih expressed concern regarding a recent Allahabad High Court statement suggesting that the woman was responsible for inviting trouble and the alleged rape.
The comment was made by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh on March 11 whilst granting bail to an accused arrested in December 2024 for alleged rape of a woman he encountered at a bar in Hauz Khas, Delhi.
Thereafter, the Supreme Court stated that whilst bail grants remain at judicial discretion based on case specifics, such unnecessary remarks against complainants must be avoided. "There is another order now by another judge. Yes, bail can be granted, but what is this discussion that she herself invited trouble, etc. One has to be careful when saying such things especially on this side (judges)," Justice Gavai remarked.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, "Complete justice should not only be done but also seen to be done. How a common person perceives such orders needs to be kept in mind."
The Supreme Court's observations came during a suo motu case concerning another Allahabad High Court ruling, which had ruled that held that acts of grabbing a child victim's breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert does nit constitute rape. The court postponed the hearing matter for a duration of four weeks.
On March 26, the court criticised the judgment's insensitivity and suspended the ruling. The matter gained attention after senior advocate Shobha Gupta, through 'We the Women of India', brought the March 17 order to the Chief Justice's attention.
The court issued notices to relevant parties and requested assistance from the Attorney General and Solicitor General. The victim's mother also challenged the High Court order.
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra's March 17 order had modified charges against two accused, originally charged under Section 376 IPC and Section 18 of POCSO Act, to lesser charges under Section 354-B IPC and Sections 9/10 of POCSO Act.
The High Court's order stated that the accused's actions of grabbing the victim's breasts and attempting to remove her clothing were insufficient to establish intent to commit rape, as "no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim."
Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih expressed concern regarding a recent Allahabad High Court statement suggesting that the woman was responsible for inviting trouble and the alleged rape.
The comment was made by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh on March 11 whilst granting bail to an accused arrested in December 2024 for alleged rape of a woman he encountered at a bar in Hauz Khas, Delhi.
Thereafter, the Supreme Court stated that whilst bail grants remain at judicial discretion based on case specifics, such unnecessary remarks against complainants must be avoided. "There is another order now by another judge. Yes, bail can be granted, but what is this discussion that she herself invited trouble, etc. One has to be careful when saying such things especially on this side (judges)," Justice Gavai remarked.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, "Complete justice should not only be done but also seen to be done. How a common person perceives such orders needs to be kept in mind."
The Supreme Court's observations came during a suo motu case concerning another Allahabad High Court ruling, which had ruled that held that acts of grabbing a child victim's breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert does nit constitute rape. The court postponed the hearing matter for a duration of four weeks.
On March 26, the court criticised the judgment's insensitivity and suspended the ruling. The matter gained attention after senior advocate Shobha Gupta, through 'We the Women of India', brought the March 17 order to the Chief Justice's attention.
The court issued notices to relevant parties and requested assistance from the Attorney General and Solicitor General. The victim's mother also challenged the High Court order.
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra's March 17 order had modified charges against two accused, originally charged under Section 376 IPC and Section 18 of POCSO Act, to lesser charges under Section 354-B IPC and Sections 9/10 of POCSO Act.
The High Court's order stated that the accused's actions of grabbing the victim's breasts and attempting to remove her clothing were insufficient to establish intent to commit rape, as "no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim."
You may also like
JoJo Siwa flooded with support as Celeb Big Brother admission leaves fans divided
Wayne Rooney reveals big Man Utd worry as he sends blunt Marcus Rashford transfer message
13-year-old boy held for raping toddler in Chandigarh
Celebrity Big Brother locked in 'bullying' row as fans slam 'toxic' behaviour
Mum laughs as she leaves court after 'taking law into own hands' with 'brutal assault'
