As per the facts of the case, the victim girl, who was nine years old at the relevant time, was asked by the accused, a 55-year-old shopkeeper, to fetch water.When the girl brought water, the accused allegedly held her hand, stroked it and said that her hands were beautiful. The victim left the spot instantly and later a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by her mother after she informed her about the incident.
Probably if she hadnt left, the accused may have gone beyond the act of stroking. Prima facie, the intention was clear and loud and obviously noone makes announcement of his malacious intentions and it only comes to limelight after the act is done.
Hon’ble Meghalaya high Court held that the intent of the accused is relevant in such cases and an offence of sexual assault will not be made out unless there is sexual intent and just holding hands of minor girl, saying her hands are beautiful is not sexual assault.
There is rarely any direct evidence of a defendant’s intent, as nearly no one who commits a crime willingly admits it. To prove criminal intent, one must rely on circumstantial evidence and the fact that the accused held the hand of the minor girl, stroked it, is enough indicator of criminal intent. (Without going to the merits of the case as it better be left to legal maestros)