'Skin To Skin' Judgment : Supreme Court Issues Notice On NCW Plea Challenging Bombay HC's POCSO Acquittal

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice on a petition filed by the National Commission for Women challenging the controversial judgment of Bombay High Court(Nagpur Bench) which held that groping over clothes without actual 'skin to skin' touch will not amount to 'sexual assault' under the POCSO Act.

A bench headed by the Chief Justice of India also issued notice on another petition filed by the State of Maharashtra against the High Court verdict.

However, the Court said that it was not entertaining the petitions filed by organizations such as Bharatiya Stree Sakthi and Youth Bar Association as the State has already challenged the judgment. The bench observed that such NGOs have no locus standi in a criminal matter.

Nevertheless, the bench has granted liberty to the organizations to approach the Attorney General for India - who has already filed a petition against the judgment- to raise their points. The AG agreed to hear such organizations.

At first, the bench was not inclined to entertain the petition filed by the NCW as well, and suggested that they intervene in the petition filed by the AG.

In response, Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra, appearing for the NCW, submitted that it has a statutory duty under the National Commission for Women Act to intervene in the matter.

Luthra referred to sub-sections (d) and (e) of Section 10(1) of the NCW Act to submit that the statutory body has the obligation to take up with authorities cases of violations of law related to protection of women and review inadequacies and deficiencies of law. The senior counsel added that the High Court judgment was a dangerous precedent.

On January 27, the Supreme Court had stayed the acquittal under the said judgment of Bombay High Court on a mention made by the Attorney General for India.

Attorney General KK Venugopal submitted that the judgment which held that 'skin to skin' contact is necessary for sexual assault under POCSO Act is 'unprecedented' and is 'likely to set a dangerous precedent'.