Nagpur (Maharashtra) [India], July 2 (ANI): The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court acquitted a 25-year-old man who was earlier convicted for allegedly teasing a minor girl by saying 'I love you' back in 2015, overturning the verdict of a lower court.

According to the judgment, the man had been sentenced to three years' imprisonment by a Nagpur sessions court under sections 354-A (sexual harassment) and 354D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POSCO) Act.

The lower court had viewed his words as stemming from sexual intent. However, the High Court overturned the verdict, observing that merely expressing love verbally does not, in itself, constitute sexual harassment.

Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, who delivered the judgment, clarified that actions such as inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, or indecent gestures accompanied by intent to violate a woman's modesty are essential elements to establish a case of sexual offence. Simply saying 'I love you' without any corroborating evidence of such intent does not fulfil the legal criteria.

The case dates back to 2015, when the accused allegedly approached a 17-year-old girl on her way home from school. According to the complaint, he held her hand, asked her name, and told her, 'I love you.' The girl informed her father, leading to the filing of a police complaint.

In its ruling, the High Court noted that there was no proof indicating that the man's actions were driven by a desire for sexual contact.

'The phrase 'I love you' alone does not automatically imply sexual intent as defined under the law,' the court stated, adding, 'There must be additional factors that point toward a motive beyond mere expression of affection.'

'Thus, the state of mind, must be to establish some sort of physical contact or must be related to or associated with sex or indicative of involvement of sex in the relationship, if it is to be considered as sexual. Words uttered should be with 'sexual intent' associated with indicative of involvement of sex or physical contact or expressing sexual overtures. Words expressed 'I Love You' would not by itself amount to 'sexual intent' as contemplated by the legislature. There should be something more which must suggest that the real intention is to drag in the angle of sex, if the words uttered are to be taken as conveying sexual intent. it should reflect by the act,' the judgment read.

The judgment is being seen as a precedent that distinguishes between emotional expression and sexual misconduct, emphasising the need for clear evidence of intent before drawing legal conclusions in such sensitive cases. (ANI)