Mumbai court sentences man to 5 years for touching minor’s posterior

Stating that the term private part must be interpreted in the context of what it means in society a Mumbai court recently sentenced a 22yearold man to 5 years in jail for touching a 10yearold girlrsquos posterior in 2017As per a report in India Today public prosecutor Sulbha Joshi told the special Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences POCSO court that the girl in 2017 had stepped out to buy bread from a nearby shop While returning she saw four boys sitting near a stationery shop laughing at her She ignored them and returned homeWhen she stepped out again with a friend to visit a temple one of the four boys accused Sahar Ali Shaikh touched her posterior and they all started laughing at her added the prosecutionThe girl rushed home and told her mother about the incident who then told her husband The father immediately returned home and the girl pointed at Shaikh who ran away before being confronted The minor girlrsquos father registered a case against Shaikh and he was arrested the next day He was put on trial and was granted bailThe accuseds lawyer told the court that the complainant had submitted before that his wife had called him and told him that his daughter was teased Stating that there is a difference between teasing and touching Shaikhs lawyer said that bum is not a private part as alleged by the victimThe prosecution retorted and said The accused touched her bum a private part obviously with the intention to sexually assault her There is no reason to disbelieve the victim and her father who immediately approached the police station and lodged the report The victim who was 10 years old at the time felt insulted and scared by the incident that she disclosed it to her mother immediatelyThe court stated that the father in his report has mentioned that one of the boys had touched the private part of his daughter Wife might not have disclosed the full incident on phone to her husband The conduct of the father in rushing home after receiving the call shows that something more had happened with his daughter than teasing It was a telephonic conversation so it is but natural that the wife instead of giving details on phone simply said that their daughter had been teased Avoiding details on phone does not mean that daughter was teased only without touching the POCSO court observedThe term private part is to be interpreted in the context of what is meant by it in our society Google might not interpret bum as private part as submitted by the advocate for the accused but it is not acceptable interpretation as far as we Indians are concerned added the courtJudge MA Baraliya while hearing the case noted that touching a girls posterior cannot be said to be without sexual intention ldquoThe victim told her parents and the police that the accused had touched her private part At the relevant time she was hardly 10 years old So she expressed her ordeal in her language So there cannot be any confusion that she was not only teased but had been touched inappropriately by the accusedAccused and other three were laughing at her when she had been to buy bread The second time when she was going still they were laughing at her Past conduct of the accused laughing at her and then touching her manifests that it was all with sexual intention to grab the chance The sexual intention is the state of mind may not necessarily be proved by direct evidence such intention is to be inferred from the attending circumstances of the case added the judgeThe court sentenced Shaikh to 5 years imprisonment and Rs 10000 fine