Removing Minor’s Undergarment With Intent to Assault Amounts to Attempt Under POCSO Act, Says Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has ruled that removing a minor’s undergarments with s*xual intent, without proceeding to commit any further act, amounts to an attempt to commit s*xual assault under the Protection of Children from S*xual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Justice Abhay S Waghwase reduced the sentence of a man convicted in a case involving a three-and-a-half-year-old girl from five years to three-and-a-half years, Live Law reported.

The trial court had convicted the accused, Ganesh Hotlappa, of molestation and aggravated s*xual assault under the POCSO Act.

What Was the Case?

According to the prosecution, Hotlappa had taken the minor girl to a cattle shed and removed both her undergarments and his own. The case concerned allegations of s*xual assault against the child. Kissing Child's Pen*s Constitutes Penetrative S*xual Assault: Kerala High Court.

The defence argued that the evidence did not establish that s*xual assault had taken place. It submitted that even if the prosecution’s version was accepted, the act would amount to an attempt to commit s*xual assault rather than the completed offence.

What Did the Bombay High Court Say?

The court held that the act established by the prosecution was the removal of the child’s undergarments with s*xual intent. Since the accused had not proceeded to carry out any further act, the court classified the conduct as an attempt to commit s*xual assault. Exposing Private Parts Without Physical Contact Not S*xual Assault: Madras High Court.

The judge also noted that the victim was below 12 years of age, making the case one involving aggravated s*xual assault under the POCSO Act.

How Does Section 18 of the POCSO Act Apply?

The court referred to Section 18 of the POCSO Act, which prescribes punishment for attempting to commit offences under the legislation. The provision provides for imprisonment of up to half the punishment prescribed for the corresponding offence, subject to the applicable statutory conditions.

The judge did not accept the additional public prosecutor’s argument that the testimonies of the minor and her mother established the completed offence of aggravated s*xual assault.

Justice Waghwase observed that substantive evidence, including the testimony of the victim and her mother, would prevail over the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which serves a corroborative role.

The ruling resulted in the accused’s sentence being reduced from five years to three-and-a-half years.

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Oct 23, 2026 06:06 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).