The Supreme Court on Wednesday put a stay on the contentious Allahabad High Court order, which ruled that acts such as grabbing a minor girl's breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert do not constitute an attempt to rape.

A bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih stayed the order, calling it "shocking."

"We are at pains to say that some of the observations made in the impugned order depict a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the author of the judgment" the bench observed in the order.

The bench noted that the judgment was not delivered impulsively but after being reserved for nearly four months. Observing that the remarks were "totally unknown to the tenets of law" and reflected "total insensitivity and an inhuman approach," the bench found it necessary to stay the order.

The court took cognizance of the matter based on a letter from Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta, founder of the NGO 'We the Women of India.'

The bench issued notices to the Union of India, the State of Uttar Pradesh, and the parties involved in the High Court proceedings. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta appeared before the court and condemned the judgment, calling it "shocking."

In the said matter, the court mentioned that the accused persons, Pawan and Akash, grabbed the breasts of the 11-year-old victim, and one of them, namely Akash, broke the string of her pyjama and tried to drag her beneath the culvert. 

The trial court, considering it a case of attempt to rape or attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, invoked Section 376 along with Section 18 (attempt to commit an offence) of the POCSO Act and issued a summoning order under these provisions.

However, the High Court altered the charges, directing that the accused be tried under the lesser offence of Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) along with Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault). The ruling sparked widespread controversy, drawing criticism from the public.

In its ruling, the High Court distinguished between preparation and attempt in the context of the alleged offence.

“The allegations levelled against the accused Pawan and Akash and facts of the case hardly constitute an offence of attempt to rape in the case. In order to bring out a charge of attempt to rape the prosecution must establish that it had gone beyond the stage of preparation. The difference between preparation and actual attempt to commit an offence consists chiefly in the greater degree of determination,” a Court observed.