The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed Allahabad High Court to “mask” the name of the complainant mother in the records in a case of an alleged rape attempt in which a judge of the high court had made controversial observations last month.

A bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and George Augustine Masih passed the order while dealing with an application filed by the victim’s mother seeking to be heard in the suo motu proceedings scheduled to come up on April 15. The NGO Just Rights for Children Alliance has also moved an application for assisting the court.

“The high court has mentioned the name of the victim’s mother, who is the complainant, and there are a number of orders of this court that the name should be redacted,” senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, appearing for the petitioners, submitted.

“List the matter along with SMWP (criminal) No 1 of 2025 on 15-04-2024. In the meantime, we direct the Registry of the High Court to mask the name of the victim’s mother,” the bench said in an order.

The Supreme Court had on March 26 stayed the controversial high court order, which said grabbing breasts and pulling the drawstring of a woman’s pyjama did not amount to the offence of attempt to rape. The apex court had said the single-judge bench’s order reflected total “insensitivity” and an “inhuman approach”.

The apex court had taken suo motu cognisance of the matter after the contentious ruling was brought to the notice of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna by We the Women of India, an NGO.

While staying the order, the bench had issued notices to the two accused persons and the state of Uttar Pradesh. It had also directed attorney-general R. Venkataramani and solicitor-general Tushar Mehta to assist the top court in the matter, which would be next heard on April 15.

The case involved a 14-year-old girl in Kasganj who was attacked on November 10, 2021, allegedly by Pawan and Akash. The accused had allegedly grabbed her breasts, torn her pyjama string and attempted to drag her under a culvert while she was walking with her mother. The assailants fled when passers-by intervened upon hearingher screams.

Though the trial court had framed charges under the Pocso Act and Section 376 (rape) of the IPC, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of the high court quashed them on the ground that the allegations did not amount to rape but rather an offence under IPC 354-B (assault or use of criminal force with intentto disrobe).

Justice Mishra had observed that the alleged actions of the duo were not “sufficient to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on the victim as apart from these facts no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim”.

He had added: “The allegation levelled against the accused Pawan and Akash and facts of the case hardly constitute an offence of attempt to rape in the case. In order to bring out a charge of attempt to rape, the prosecution must establish that it had gone beyond the stage of preparation.”

The judgment had evoked widespread outrage.