The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the observations made in an order of the Allahabad high court which said the mere grabbing of the breast and pulling the string of a 'pyjama' do not amount to offence of rape.

According to Bar and Bench, a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih observed it was "pained" to say that some of the observations made in the high court order depicted total "insensitiveness and an inhuman approach".

The bench issued notice to the Centre, Uttar Pradesh government and others seeking their responses in the suo motu proceedings initiated over the high court's March 17 order.

Slammed by Indira Jaising

The order was last week slammed by senior advocate Indira Jaising, who took to social media platform X to say, "(This) requires suo moto action by SC. Judges have been pulled up for much less by SC. Grabbing breasts, breaking pyjama string is not enough for charge of attempt to rape, says Allahabad High Court."

What the high court order said last week

The high court made the statement while modifying an earlier trial court order that had summoned two accused, Pawan and Akash, under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 18 (attempt to commit an offence) of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, according to a LiveLaw report.

A bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra ruled that the accused would only face charges under Section 354-B (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) of the IPC and Sections 9 and 10 (aggravated sexual assault) of the Pocso Act.

'Hardly an attempt to rape'

“The allegations 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 difference between preparation and actual attempt to commit an offence consists chiefly in the greater degree of determination,” Justice Mishra observed as the bench partly allowed the criminal revision plea filed by three accused, LiveLaw had quoted the high court as saying.