Justice Pushpa Ganediwala – India Legal https://www.indialegallive.com Your legal news destination! Tue, 16 Nov 2021 11:05:26 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.4 https://d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net/IL/uploads/2020/12/16123527/cropped-IL_Logo-1-32x32.jpg Justice Pushpa Ganediwala – India Legal https://www.indialegallive.com 32 32 183211854 Bombay High Court judge who gave controversial POCSO rulings has her fresh term cut to 1 year https://www.indialegallive.com/top-news-of-the-day/news/bombay-hc-pushpa-ganediwala-pocso-rulings/ Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:01:42 +0000 https://www.indialegallive.com/?p=142154 Bombay judgeJustice Pushpa Ganediwala given a fresh one-year term instead of two years as recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium.]]> Bombay judge

Bombay High Court additional judge Justice Pushpa Ganediwala, who had delivered two controversial POCSO rulings, was on Friday given a fresh one-year term instead of two years as recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium.

The government modified the proposal and instead gave her an extension of just one year as an additional judge overruling the recommendation made by the Supreme Court Collegium to extend the woman judge’s tenure by two years.

The SC collegium, which had asked for giving Justice Ganediwala a further term of two years, comprised Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde, Justices N.V. Ramana and Rohinton F. Nariman. Justice Ganediwala’s new tenure will be effective from today as her earlier tenure as an additional judge ended Friday.

Justice Ganediwala had first acquitted a man accused of sexually assaulting a 12-year-girl on January 19. The man was accused of groping a 12-year-old girl’s breast and because he did not make skin-to-skin contact, the judge cleared him of punishment under POCSO charges. A few days later, Justice Ganediwala ruled that holding hands of a five-year-old girl and unzipping trousers do not amount to “sexual assault” under POCSO Act.

On January 27, the Supreme Court stayed the order acquitting the man of POCSO charges after Attorney General K.K. Venugopal said it would set a dangerous precedent in other similar crimes.

Justice Ganediwala’s extension was notified by the Union law ministry on Friday evening. Since the judge’s tenure as an additional judge was ending on Saturday, it was incumbent to notify her extension by the end of Friday so as to maintain continuity of her judgeship and not affect her seniority. Under constitutional provisions, an additional judge can be appointed for a maximum period of two years unlike permanent judges, who are hold office till the age of 62.

Read Also: Egypt releases Al Jazeera journalist after 4 years

]]>
142154
SC issues notice in NCW plea against Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact under POCSO Act https://www.indialegallive.com/constitutional-law-news/supreme-court-news/supreme-court-national-commission-for-women-bombay-hc-sexual-assault/ Wed, 10 Feb 2021 09:31:12 +0000 https://www.indialegallive.com/?p=141472 Sexual HarassmentThe Supreme Court today issued notice in a plea filed by National commission for Women (NCW) challenging the Bombay HC judgment passed by Justice Pushpa Ganediwala, wherein she held that there must be “skin to skin contact with sexual intent” for an act to be considered sexual assault.]]> Sexual Harassment

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice in a plea filed by the National Commission for Women (NCW) challenging the Bombay High Court judgment passed by Justice Pushpa Ganediwala, wherein she held that there must be “skin to skin contact with sexual intent” for an act to be considered sexual assault.

The Bombay High Court had held that pressing the breast of a 12-year-old child without removing her top will not fall within the definition of ‘sexual assault’ under Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). 

A three-judge bench of Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, Justices A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian issued the notice. 

The petitioner has stated that it is aggrieved by the HC order, and the perverse interpretation adopted by the High Court that the term ‘physical contact’ in Section 7, POCSO Act means only ‘skin to skin touch’. 

It has further been argued, “If such a perverse interpretation of physical contact is allowed, it will adversely impact the basic rights of women, who are victims of sexual offences in the Society and will undermine the beneficial statutory safeguards prescribed under various legislations aimed at protecting the interest of women.”

The petition thus raises the following substantial questions of law of great public importance for consideration of the ApexCourt:

1. Whether to constitute an offence under Section 7 of the POCSO Act, the only requirement is to touch a child with sexual intent?

2. Whether the impugned order has far reaching ramifications/repercussions for women, exposing them to a desensitized Society?

The petitioner has further submitted that such a narrow interpretation adopted in the impugned order sets a dangerous precedent, which would have a cascading effect on the safety of women and children.

Earlier, the Apex Court had stayed the acquittal of the accused on the matter after it was mentioned by Attorney General K.K. Venugopal.

The bench dismissed another petition filed by Bharatiya Stree Shakti challenging the same order while stating that the petitioner did not have locus in the present case.

Read Also: MJ Akbar vs Priya Ramani: Delhi court defers verdict to February 17

]]>
141472