Touching A Child's Breasts With Sexual-Intent Constitutes Sexual Assault U/S 7 POCSO Act: Meghalaya High Court

  • Section 5 (m) POCSO Act, Penetrative Sexual Assault, Deep, Complete Penetration, Meghalaya High Court,

    Image By: Kausik Roy

    Listen to this Article

    The Meghalaya High Court has held that touching the breast of a child with sexual intent constitutes “sexual assault” under Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), even in the absence of penetration.

    The Court observed that the statutory definition expressly covers sexual-intent physical contact with the breast of a child and upheld the conviction of a man under Section 9(n) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act, despite the survivor and other witnesses stating that there was no penetrative sexual assault.

    Justice Revati Mohiti Dere remarked that: “Whoever, with sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast of the child … or does any other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact without penetration is said to commit sexual assault.”

    Background:

    The appellant, who was the uncle of the 15-year-old survivor, was accused of sexually assaulting her on September 23, 2019, while she was staying at his house for her studies. The survivor subsequently disclosed the incident to her elder sister, following which her mother lodged an FIR.

    The Special POCSO Court convicted the appellant under Section 9(n) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved, the appellant challenged the conviction before the Meghalaya High Court.

    The High Court held that the absence of penetrative sexual assault did not undermine the conviction, as the survivor's evidence that the appellant had fondled her breasts remained unchallenged. Referring to Section 7 of the POCSO Act, the Court observed that touching a child's breast with sexual intent constitutes sexual assault even without penetration.

    The Court also noted the corroborative evidence of the survivor's mother and sister and found no infirmity in the trial court's conviction under Section 9(n) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

    Case Name: Rockyroy Lyngkhoi v. State of Meghalaya & Ors.

    Case No.: Crl.A. No. 27 of 2024

    Date of Decision: 01.09.2026

    Click Here To Read/Download Order


    Next Story