skin-to-skin-contact-not-necessary-for-sexual-offenses

The Supreme Court on November 18, set aside the Bombay High Court ruling that "skin to skin" contact was not necessary to constitute an offense under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act.

A three-member bench headed by Justice UU Lalit quashed the Bombay High Court's decision, saying that the most important ground for prescribing sexual assault is sexual intent and not skin-to-skin contact with the child.

Significantly, the Bombay High Court in its judgment held that skin-to-skin contact is essential for the offense of POCSO and convicted and sentenced two years of jail term to the two accused who had wrongfully touched the body of a minor.

Attorney General KK Venugopal in the Supreme Court has opposed the Bombay HC's decision, arguing that the HC's interpretation would mean that "one can exploit a child by wearing surgical gloves and escape". He said that it will be taken as an example and its result will be 'disastrous'.

It is to be known that the POCSO Act defines sexual assault. When someone "with sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast of a child or forces the child to touch the vagina, penis, anus or breast of such person or any other person, or with sexual intent to do such act in which involves physical contact without penetration, then it would be termed as sexual assault".

The Supreme Court had questioned the interpretation of touch during the hearing. The court said, "What is meant by touch, is it just a touch? Even if you are wearing a piece of cloth, they are not trying to touch the clothes. We should look at touch in the sense that Parliament intended."

A bench of Justices UU Lalit, SR Bhat and Bela M Trivedi said in its judgment.