The Kerala High Court has held that a child’s use of the word “chest” while describing an alleged sexually motivated touching can, in the context of a sexual offence, be understood as referring to the breast.
Justice A Badharudeen made the observation while hearing an appeal filed by a 58-year-old man convicted in a case involving the sexual assault of a 12-year-old boy in Malappuram.
The Court acknowledged that “chest” and “breast” have distinct medical and anatomical meanings. However, it said that in the context of sexual offences, the term “chest” is commonly used to refer to the breast.
According to the Court, when a child states that an accused grabbed his chest with sexual intent, the reasonable interpretation is that the accused touched the child’s breast. Such an act can therefore fall within the definition of sexual assault under Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The case arose from an incident in May 2022, when the child went to a nearby shop to buy mosquito repellent. The accused allegedly approached him from behind, grabbed him around the stomach and chest, and then held his hand while offering him ₹50 to accompany him to a vacant house.
The child escaped and informed his parents, after which a case was registered.
A special POCSO court later convicted the accused of aggravated sexual assault under Section 9(l) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act. He was sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and fined ₹50,000.
Before the High Court, the accused argued that merely touching a child’s chest could not amount to sexual assault. He also contended that the prosecution had not established repeated sexual assaults, a requirement for the aggravated offence alleged against him.
The High Court rejected the argument concerning the meaning of “chest”, holding that the term could be understood as referring to the breast in the circumstances of the case.
However, the Court agreed that the evidence did not establish that the alleged offence had been committed repeatedly. It therefore set aside the conviction for aggravated sexual assault and instead convicted the accused under Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
His sentence was consequently reduced from seven years to three years of rigorous imprisonment, while the fine was reduced from ₹50,000 to ₹5,000.
