Latest news with #UrmilaJoshi-Phalke
India Gazette
02-07-2025
- India Gazette
Saying 'I Love You' not proof of sexual intent: Bombay High Court acquits man in POCSO case
Nagpur (Maharashtra) [India], July 2 (ANI): The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court acquitted a 25-year-old man who was earlier convicted for allegedly teasing a minor girl by saying 'I love you' back in 2015, overturning the verdict of a lower court. According to the judgment, the man had been sentenced to three years' imprisonment by a Nagpur sessions court under sections 354-A (sexual harassment) and 354D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POSCO) Act. The lower court had viewed his words as stemming from sexual intent. However, the High Court overturned the verdict, observing that merely expressing love verbally does not, in itself, constitute sexual harassment. Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, who delivered the judgment, clarified that actions such as inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, or indecent gestures accompanied by intent to violate a woman's modesty are essential elements to establish a case of sexual offence. Simply saying 'I love you' without any corroborating evidence of such intent does not fulfil the legal criteria. The case dates back to 2015, when the accused allegedly approached a 17-year-old girl on her way home from school. According to the complaint, he held her hand, asked her name, and told her, 'I love you.' The girl informed her father, leading to the filing of a police complaint. In its ruling, the High Court noted that there was no proof indicating that the man's actions were driven by a desire for sexual contact. 'The phrase 'I love you' alone does not automatically imply sexual intent as defined under the law,' the court stated, adding, 'There must be additional factors that point toward a motive beyond mere expression of affection.' 'Thus, the state of mind, must be to establish some sort of physical contact or must be related to or associated with sex or indicative of involvement of sex in the relationship, if it is to be considered as sexual. Words uttered should be with 'sexual intent' associated with indicative of involvement of sex or physical contact or expressing sexual overtures. Words expressed 'I Love You' would not by itself amount to 'sexual intent' as contemplated by the legislature. There should be something more which must suggest that the real intention is to drag in the angle of sex, if the words uttered are to be taken as conveying sexual intent. it should reflect by the act,' the judgment read. The judgment is being seen as a precedent that distinguishes between emotional expression and sexual misconduct, emphasising the need for clear evidence of intent before drawing legal conclusions in such sensitive cases. (ANI)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
02-07-2025
- Business Standard
Saying 'I Love You' not sexual intent, rules Bombay HC in Pocso case
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court acquitted a 25-year-old man who was earlier convicted for allegedly teasing a minor girl by saying "I love you" back in 2015, overturning the verdict of a lower court. According to the judgment, the man had been sentenced to three years' imprisonment by a Nagpur sessions court under sections 354-A (sexual harassment) and 354D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POSCO) Act. The lower court had viewed his words as stemming from sexual intent. However, the High Court overturned the verdict, observing that merely expressing love verbally does not, in itself, constitute sexual harassment. Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, who delivered the judgment, clarified that actions such as inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, or indecent gestures accompanied by intent to violate a woman's modesty are essential elements to establish a case of sexual offence. Simply saying "I love you" without any corroborating evidence of such intent does not fulfil the legal criteria. The case dates back to 2015, when the accused allegedly approached a 17-year-old girl on her way home from school. According to the complaint, he held her hand, asked her name, and told her, "I love you." The girl informed her father, leading to the filing of a police complaint. In its ruling, the High Court noted that there was no proof indicating that the man's actions were driven by a desire for sexual contact. "The phrase 'I love you' alone does not automatically imply sexual intent as defined under the law," the court stated, adding, "There must be additional factors that point toward a motive beyond mere expression of affection." "Thus, the state of mind, must be to establish some sort of physical contact or must be related to or associated with sex or indicative of involvement of sex in the relationship, if it is to be considered as sexual. Words uttered should be with "sexual intent" associated with indicative of involvement of sex or physical contact or expressing sexual overtures. Words expressed "I Love You" would not by itself amount to "sexual intent" as contemplated by the legislature. There should be something more which must suggest that the real intention is to drag in the angle of sex, if the words uttered are to be taken as conveying sexual intent. it should reflect by the act," the judgment read. The judgment is being seen as a precedent that distinguishes between emotional expression and sexual misconduct, emphasising the need for clear evidence of intent before drawing legal conclusions in such sensitive cases.
News18
02-07-2025
- News18
'Saying I Love You Not Sexual Harassment Unless…' Bombay HC Acquits Man Under POCSO
The court concluded that the minor status alone could not attract POCSO provisions without fulfilling other statutory requirements like sexual intent and physical contact The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has acquitted a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), holding that mere expression of romantic interest without sexual intent does not amount to sexual harassment under the law. Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, while setting aside the trial court's conviction under Section 354-A(i) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, observed, 'Words expressed 'I Love You' would not by itself amount to 'sexual intent' as contemplated by the legislature. There should be something more which must suggest that the real intention is to drag in the angle of sex, if the words uttered are to be taken as conveying sexual intent." While the court did accept the validity of the victim's birth certificate, confirming she was a minor (born on May 12, 1999), it concluded that the minor status alone could not attract POCSO provisions without fulfilling other statutory requirements like sexual intent and physical contact. 'Admittedly, intention is inner compartment of mind of that person and has to be determined from surrounding facts and circumstances. If somebody says that he is in love with another person or expresses his feelings itself would not amount to an intent showing some sort of his sexual intention. What constitutes such sexuality or sexual intent and what is not, is a question of fact," the court added. Background of the Case The case arose out of a complaint by a 17-year-old girl, a student of Class 11, who alleged that on October 23, 2015, while returning home with her cousin, the accused Ravindra Narete approached her on a motorcycle near an agricultural field in Katol, Nagpur district. He allegedly caught her hand, refused to let her go until she disclosed her name, and said 'I love you." The FIR was registered the same day, attracting charges under Sections 354-A(i) and 354-D(1)(i) of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The trial court had convicted the appellant and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for three years along with a fine of Rs 5,000. Rationale by the Court On Section 354-A IPC (sexual harassment), the court emphasised that: 'The expression sexual intent is a question of fact and it is to be determined on the basis of the evidence. If somebody says that he is in love with another person or expresses his feelings itself would not amount to an 'intent' showing some sort of his sexual intention." Further, referring to the POCSO charge under Section 8 (punishing sexual assault), the court noted that Section 7 requires proof of physical contact with sexual intent involving specific body parts or any other act of sexual intent. The court held that: 'There is no evidence on record showing that there was any gesture in the nature of eye expression or body language of the accused… Utterances in question have not been made repeatedly, but it was made only once." The court also pointed out that the trial judge failed to appreciate the correct definition of 'sexual assault" under POCSO and erred in convicting the appellant without evidence showing sexual intent. First Published: July 02, 2025, 13:52 IST
Hans India
02-07-2025
- Hans India
Saying 'I love you' is not sexual intent, says Bombay HC
Mumbai: Saying 'I love you' is only an expression of feelings and does not in itself amount to "sexual intent", the Bombay High Court's Nagpur bench has said acquitting a 35-year-old man accused of molesting a teenage girl in 2015. Any sexual act includes inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, indecent gestures or remarks made with an intent to insult the modesty of a woman, a bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke said in the order. As per the complaint, the man had accosted the 17-year-old victim in Nagpur, held her hand and said 'I love you'. A sessions court in Nagpur had convicted him under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in 2017 and sentenced him to three years' imprisonment. The HC quashed the man's conviction, noting there was no circumstance to indicate his real intention was to establish sexual contact with the victim. "Words expressed 'I love you' would not by itself amount to sexual intent as contemplated by the legislature," the court said. There should be something more to suggest that the real intention behind saying 'I love you' was to drag the angle of sex, the HC added. The prosecution's case is that the man accosted the girl when she was returning home from school, held her hand, asked her name and said "I love you". The girl managed to leave the place and went home, and told her father about the incident pursuant to which a FIR was lodged. The high court said the case does not fall under the purview of molestation or sexual harassment. In the present case, there is no evidence that reveals the accused had said 'I love you' with a sexual intent, the HC said. "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," the order said.
Hindustan Times
02-07-2025
- Hindustan Times
Simply saying 'I love you' to a minor girl does not amount to sexual harassment: HC
Jul 02, 2025 09:50 AM IST MUMBAI: The Nagpur bench of Bombay high court on Monday acquitted a 27-year-old man accused of sexually harassing a minor girl in 2015, observing that he could not be convicted for merely saying 'I love you' to the girl and holding her hand. Simply saying 'I love you' to a minor girl does not amount to sexual harassment: HC The incident dates back to October 2017 in Nagpur when the 17-year-old girl was walking back home from her college. The accused, who was also aged 17, allegedly approached her on a motorcycle, held her hand and said 'I love you'. Based on her complaint, the police registered an FIR against the accused. A sessions court had convicted the man under Section 354A (sexual harassment) and 354D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 8 (sexual harassment) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. A single-judge bench of justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke heard a petition filed by the accused in 2017 challenging his conviction by an additional sessions judge in Nagpur. The man claimed that he was booked due to previous enmity between the duo and that there was no witness to the incident. He further claimed that the charges put up against him were also not established as there was no evidence to show he had followed her and forced personal interaction despite a clear indication of disinterest from her. Taking this into account, the high court set aside his conviction noting that the prosecution could not prove the 'sexual intent' of the accused and said that merely expressing his feelings saying 'I love you' and holding her hand does not amount to sexual harassment.
