Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

The Supreme Court overturned the Rajasthan High Court's decision in Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors that had quashed a sexual assault case against a teacher accused of rubbing a student's breast, based on a compromise between the victim's father and the teacher. The Court observed that such offenses, particularly under the POCSO Act the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, cannot be treated as private matters for compromise due to their serious societal impact.  

• Court ruled that sexual assault cases must proceed in the interest of justice, affirming that such crimes against children are heinous and cannot be settled privately. 

What was the Background of Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors case? 

• On 6th January 2022, a teacher (the accused) allegedly sexually assaulted a Class XI student in a Higher Secondary School in Rajasthan when she was alone in the classroom. 
• The specific allegations were that the teacher:  
  • Checked through the window to ensure no one was nearby 
  • Approached the student from behind 
  • Patted her cheeks 
  • accused of rubbing the victim's breast 
  • When she ran away, he followed her and hurled casteist abuses including terms like 'dedh Chamar' 
• When the student sought help from other teachers:  
  • They asked her to remain silent about the incident 
  • The Principal made her sign a blank paper 
  • A teacher went to the victim's house and brought her mother to school claiming the girl was unwell 
• The victim was in a terrified state at school and couldn't speak to her mother. However:  
  • After reaching home, she disclosed the incident to her mother 
  • The mother informed the father, who was away in another village 
  • When the father returned the next day, the victim narrated the entire incident to him 
• On 8th January, 2022, the victim's father filed an FIR against the teacher under:  
  • Sections 354A, 342, 509, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 
  • Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act,2012 
  • Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(b) & 3(2)(vii) of the SC/ST Act,1989. 
• On 31^th January, 2022, the accused teacher reached a compromise with the victim's father. 
• Following this compromise, the teacher filed a petition in the Rajasthan High Court seeking to quash the FIR. 
• After the High Court quashed the FIR, some concerned citizens from the same tehsil and district challenged this decision, leading to the present case. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court held that rubbing a child's breast constitutes "sexual assault" under Section 7 of POCSO Act, punishable with imprisonment between three to five years, and such offenses must be viewed as heinous and serious crimes against society. 
• The Court unequivocally established that sexual assault cases, particularly those occurring within educational institutions by teachers, cannot be classified as purely private matters and inherently carry serious societal impact. 
• The High Court's decision to quash the FIR based on compromise was deemed erroneous as it failed to properly examine the nature and gravity of the offenses and misapplied the law laid down in Gian Singh's case. 
• The Court emphatically ruled that POCSO Act offenses cannot be permitted to be settled through compromise, and a victim's father lacks the authority to enter into such settlements with the accused. 
• On the question of locus standi, the Court held that given the grave nature and societal impact of sexual assault, third parties can maintain petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution as prosecuting such offenders serves society's interest. 
• The Court mandated that before quashing any FIR, courts must consider whether the crime is against society or an individual, the nature and seriousness of the offense, its statutory classification, stage of proceedings, and circumstances of compromise. 
• The Court observed that the existence of a compromise between parties, even if it might affect conviction prospects, cannot be grounds for abruptly terminating investigation in cases of this nature. 
• Noting the victim's age (16 years), the alleged pressure to prevent report filing, and the suspiciously quick compromise (within 23 days), the Court emphasized that such circumstances demanded deeper scrutiny before accepting any compromise. 

Section 7 and Section 8 of POSCO Act 

• Section 7 deals with Sexual Assault. 
  • It states that "Whoever, with sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast of the child or makes the child touch the vagina, penis, anus or breast of such person or any other person, or does any other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact without penetration is said to commit sexual assault." 
• The core of Section 7 is the presence of sexual intent in the act. 
• Specific Body Parts: The act of sexual assault is specifically defined as touching a child's vagina, penis, anus, or breast. These are the body parts listed under the law, and any contact with these parts, regardless of the manner, constitutes sexual assault under this provision. 
• Making the Child Touch: It’s not just the touching of the child that constitutes the offense; the law also covers situations where the accused makes the child touch their own or another person’s private body parts (vagina, penis, anus, or breast). 
• Physical Contact Without Penetration: The key aspect of "sexual assault" under Section 7 is that it involves physical contact without the need for penetration. Penetration is required for a more severe offense like rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, in the case of sexual assault, the contact is non-penetrative. 
• Other Acts with Sexual Intent: This section also includes other acts of sexual nature involving physical contact with sexual intent that do not fall into the specific categories mentioned above. Essentially, any inappropriate physical interaction with sexual intent that involves touching any private body part of the child falls under sexual assault. 

Section 8  

• Section 8 deals with punishment for Sexual Assault 
  • It states that "Whoever, commits sexual assault, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine." 
• Punishment Duration: The punishment for committing sexual assault is imprisonment for a term not less than three years. The minimum term ensures that there is a baseline penalty for the offense, highlighting its seriousness. The sentence can be extended up to five years depending on the specifics of the case and the discretion of the court. 
• Imprisonment of Either Description: This refers to imprisonment in either a rigorous (hard labor) or simple (without hard labor) form. The law gives courts flexibility in sentencing, though for sexual assault, a longer sentence (usually rigorous) may be imposed based on the seriousness of the offense. 
• Liability to Fine: The convicted person is also liable to pay a fine. The amount of the fine is not specified in Section 8 but can be determined by the court based on the facts and circumstances of the case.