SC sets aside Calcutta HC verdict advising adolescent girls to 'control urges'

PTC News Desk: The Supreme Court set aside an earlier Calcutta High Court ruling that acquitted an accused in a sexual assault case and included "objectionable" observations directing adolescent girls to "control sexual urges".

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan stated that it has issued several directives to authorities on dealing with cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Justice Oka, who delivered the verdict on behalf of the bench, stated that directions have also been given on how the courts should write their judgements.

On December 8, last year, the Supreme Court condemned the verdict, calling some of its observations "highly objectionable and completely unwarranted."

The Supreme Court had taken note of some of the observations made by a division bench of the High Court and filed a writ petition on its own, stating that judges are not supposed to "preach" when making verdicts.

The West Bengal government has also challenged the high court's October 18, 2023 judgement, which included these "objectionable observations".

In its decision, the high court stated that female adolescents should "control sexual urges" since, "in the eyes of society, she is the loser when she gives in to the sexual pleasure of hardly two minutes."

The top court made the observations while hearing an appeal from a man sentenced to 20 years in prison for sexual assault. The high court had acquitted the man.

While hearing the case on January 4, the Supreme Court noted that certain paragraphs in the high court verdict were "problematic" and that writing such judgements was "absolutely wrong".

In its ruling dated December 8, last year, the Supreme Court referred to some observations made by the High Court and stated, "Prima facie, the said observations are completely in violation of the rights of adolescents guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

The Supreme Court stated in the appeal against conviction that the high court was only required to rule on the merits of the appeal.

"But we find that the high court has discussed so many issues which were irrelevant. Prima facie, we are of the view that while writing a judgment in such an appeal, the judges are not expected to express their personal views. They are not expected to preach," SC said.

The high court acquitted the man, ruling that it was a case of "non-exploitative consensual sexual relationship between two consenting adolescents, though consent in view of the victim's age is immaterial".

The high court had stated that it was the responsibility of each teenager who is female to "protect her right to the integrity of her body; protect her dignity and self-worth; thrive for the overall development of herself transcending gender barriers; control sexual urge/urges as in the eyes of the society she is the loser when she gives in to enjoy the sexual pleasure of hardly two minutes; protect her right to autonomy of her body and her privacy".