The Supreme Court of India has taken suo motu cognizance of a Patna High Court judgment that held removing a woman’s salwar and pressing her chest did not constitute an attempt to rape. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant described the observations in the High Court judgment as “offending” and issued notice to the accused to consider setting aside those findings.
Case Title (Supreme Court): In Re: Order dated 09.07.2026 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 775/2013 and Ancillary Issues
Supreme Court Bench: Three-Judge Bench — Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana
High Court Case Title: Himanshu Kr. Pathak v. The State of Bihar [Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 775/2013]
High Court Judge: Justice Purnendu Singh
Date of SC Action: September 23, 2026
Key Factual Background & High Court Order
- The Incident & Trial: In 2008, the accused, Himanshu Pathak, locked a woman inside his photography studio, tried to forcibly remove her salwar, and physically molested her by pressing her chest. A trial court convicted him for wrongful confinement and attempt to commit rape under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
- Patna High Court Ruling (July 9, 2026): On appeal, Justice Purnendu Singh set aside the conviction for attempt to rape, modifying it to outraging a woman’s modesty under Section 354 IPC.
- High Court’s Reasoning: The High Court held that while criminal force was undoubtedly used to outrage her modesty, the acts did not establish an overt act that unequivocally demonstrated an intention to commit penetration/rape.
Supreme Court Intervenes
- “Offending Observations”: Recognizing the wider legal and social ramifications of downplaying acts of severe sexual violence, the Supreme Court stepped in suo motu.
- Notice Issued: The Bench noted that the offending observations could only be formally set aside after affording a hearing to the accused.
- Directions: The Court issued notice to the accused, requesting Senior Advocate & Additional Solicitor General S.D. Sanjay to ensure service through local Bihar police authorities.
Key Legal Concepts Simplified
- Suo Motu Cognizance: The power of constitutional courts (Supreme Court / High Courts) to take up a legal matter on their own initiative without a formal petition being filed by an aggrieved party.
- Attempt to Rape (Section 376 / 511 IPC) vs. Outraging Modesty (Section 354 IPC):
- Outraging Modesty (Section 354): Involves using assault or criminal force intending or knowing it will outrage a woman’s modesty.
- Attempt to Rape (Section 376 r/w 511): Involves taking direct, unequivocal steps beyond mere preparation toward executing the act of rape, where the perpetrator is prevented or frustrated from completing it.
Status & Next Steps
- The Supreme Court has posted the matter for further consideration after service of notice on the accused.
- The intervention aims to lay down clear boundaries regarding what constitutes an “attempt” in sexual offense jurisprudence, preventing overly narrow interpretations from diluting protections for victims