Bombay High Court order on ‘skin to skin touch’ will be quashed? Supreme Court reserved decision

0
38

Table of Contents

Highlights

  • Supreme Court reserves judgment in skin to skin touch case
  • The parties concerned can present written arguments in three days.
  • ‘The decision of the High Court will set a wrong precedent and it will be dangerous’

New Delhi
The Supreme Court has reserved its decision after hearing the appeal filed against the decision of the Bombay High Court in the ‘Skin to Skin Touch’ case. The Attorney General has urged the Supreme Court to set aside the Bombay High Court’s decision in the Skin to Skin Touch case. On the other hand, the National Commission for Women has also challenged the decision of the Bombay High Court by filing a separate application.

The Bombay High Court had held that touching the internal part of a minor without removing his clothes is not a sexual assault. It said in its decision that unless there is skin-to-skin touch, it cannot be considered as sexual misconduct. During the hearing of the appeal filed against this decision, a bench headed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court had stayed the order of the High Court on January 27.

A bench headed by Justice UU Lalit of the Supreme Court, after hearing the matter, reserved the verdict, saying that the parties concerned can present written arguments in the matter in three days. During the hearing of the case on Thursday, the Maharashtra government, while arguing against the High Court’s decision, said that they also agree with the argument of the Attorney General and present the same argument.

Earlier, the Attorney General asked the Supreme Court to set aside the Bombay High Court judgment that made skin-to-skin touch mandatory for offenses under POCSO. The Attorney General has said in the Supreme Court that the High Court’s decision will set a wrong precedent and it will be dangerous. He argued that skin-to-skin touch is not mandatory under the POCSO Act and the Attorney General approached the Supreme Court to set aside the Bombay High Court’s decision.

.

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here