Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Supreme Court has stayed a controversial Bombay High Court verdict, which acquitted a man found guilty of assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the grounds that he groped his victim over her clothes and there was no skin-to-skin contact between them. A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde took cognisance instantaneously after Attorney General K. K. Venugopal made a special mention in court, saying the High Court decision would set a very dangerous precedent and cripple the intention of POCSO to punish sexual offenders.A Single Judge of Bombay High Courts Nagpur Bench created a furore after it acquitted a man under POCSO Act and held that an act against a minor would amount to groping or sexual assault only if there was skin-to-skin contact. The High Court had concluded that mere touching or pressing of a clothed body of a child did not amount to sexual assault. "The accused was sentenced to minimum three years imprisonment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. That was set aside by the HC and his sentence was reduced to one year under Section 354 (assault of a women to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code. This is very disturbing," Mr. Venugopal submitted"Mr. Venugopal, do you remember how we took cognisance when the Attorney General mentioned about a judge ordering a public hanging?" Chief Justice asked Mr. Venugopal, who said he did.The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had earlier asked the Maharashtra government to urgently appeal the High Court judgement. Meanwhile, several organisations, including the Youth Bar Association of India, represented by advocate Manju Jetley, also moved the top court against the HC judgement.The petitioners said they were badly perturbed to note that the HC verdict contained several observations about the victim childs modesty, which were both derogatory and defamatory. The child was even named in the judgement, the petition said."Abuse and outraging the modesty of a child has been a matter of great concern. POCSO Act was enacted to deal with evil and to impart speedy justice. Special courts were formed. The observations [in the judgement of the HC] have badly shaken the belief of the petitioners and like-minded people," the petition said.[Extracted with edits and revisions from Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order on skin-to-skin contact for sexual assault under POCSO Act, The Hindu]Q.Imagine a situation that today in Nagpur, someone is charged with the POCSO Act and he seeks protection under the order of Nagpur Bench of Bombay HC that there was no direct physical skin-to-skin contact. Can he do so?a)Yes, it is a valid law having the force of the High Court.b)No, the decision was stayed by the Supreme Court.c)Yes, because direct physical skin-to-skin contact is necessary for prosecution under the POCSO Act.d)Both 1 and 3Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.