4 days ago
Saying 'I love you' not molestation or sexual offence: High Court acquits man convicted in case involving a teenager
The Bombay High Court overturned a man's conviction for molestation and violating the POCSO Act, stating that expressing "I love you" alone doesn't demonstrate sexual intent. The court emphasized that molestation requires evidence of inappropriate touching or gestures aimed at insulting a woman's modesty. The accused was initially sentenced to three years in prison by a sessions court in 2017.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
HC says no proof of sexual intention
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
No evidence of molestation: High Court
The Bombay High Court has ruled that simply saying "I love you" does not amount to sexual intent under the law, acquitting a man who was convicted of molesting a 17-year-old girl in Nagpur in 2015. The man had been sentenced to three years in prison by a sessions court in 2017 under charges of molestation and under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.A bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke of the Nagpur bench said that words such as "I love you" alone do not indicate sexual intent as required under law for a conviction. The court passed the judgment on Monday, quashing the earlier conviction."Words expressed 'I love you' would not by itself amount to sexual intent as contemplated by the legislature," the court court further stated, "If somebody says that he is in love with another person or expresses his feelings that in itself would not amount to an intent showing some sort of sexual intention."According to the police complaint, the man had approached the teenage girl when she was returning home from school. He allegedly held her hand, asked her name, and said "I love you". The girl then went home and informed her father, who lodged a First Information Report (FIR).A sessions court had found the man guilty under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act , sentencing him to three years in jail in High Court observed that the accused's actions did not meet the legal definition of molestation or sexual harassment. The court said that a sexual act includes inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, or indecent gestures or remarks made with the intent to insult a woman's modesty."Any sexual act includes inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, indecent gestures or remarks made with an intent to insult the modesty of a woman," the order this case, the High Court found no evidence suggesting that the accused said 'I love you' with the aim of establishing sexual contact. The court held that without such intent, the offence under the POCSO Act and molestation charges could not PTI
