'Gender Handbook Too Hardvard-Oriented': CJI Flags Need For Simpler Court Language In Assault Cases

Last Updated:February 11, 2026, 11:07 IST

Chief Justice Surya Kant has urged courts to use simple, accessible language in sexual offence cases, slamming the Allahabad High Court's March 2025 judgment.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Tuesday observed that the judicial handbook detailing legal terminology was “too much Harvard-oriented" and emphasised the urgent need for language that can be understood by victims in sexual offence cases and their families.

He stressed that terms used by courts in such cases must be simple, accessible, and grounded in real-world understanding, not complex and academically tilted.

His remark came in response to submissions in the Supreme Court’s suo moto hearing challenging a controversial March 2025 judgment of the Allahabad High Court that had triggered nationwide criticism for its narrow interpretation of the elements of sexual assault involving a minor girl.

THE CONTROVERSIAL ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ORDER

The Supreme Court’s proceedings arise out of an order passed on March 17, 2025, by a single judge of the Allahabad High Court, which held that certain acts, including grabbing the breasts of an 11-year-old victim and breaking the string of her pyjama with the intention of dragging her beneath a culvert, did not constitute the offence of rape or attempt to rape.

The accused, identified as Pawan and Akash, allegedly grabbed the breasts of the 11-year-old girl.

One of them snapped the pyjama string and attempted to drag her under a culvert, but fled after a passerby intervened.

The trial court had initially summoned the accused under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (rape) and Section 18 of the POCSO Act (punishment for attempt to commit an offence).

The Allahabad High Court modified the summons, ruling that the facts did not prima facie make out an attempt to rape, and instead directed trial only under Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated and serious sexual assault) along with a minor charge under Section 354-B IPC (assault with intent to disrobe).

The High Court bench stated that because there was no allegation of penetrative sexual assault or sufficient evidence of a determination to commit rape, the offence could not be elevated to attempt to rape.

THEN THE SUPREME COURT TOOK A SUO MOTO CASE

In reaction to the Allahabad High Court order, the Supreme Court took up the matter on its own motion in March 2025.

The top court bench described the High Court’s reasoning as deeply problematic in terms of legal categorisation and criminal justice standards.

The bench noted that while Sections 9 and 10 of POCSO provide for punishment for serious sexual assault and that Section 354-B covers certain forms of assault, the threshold for attempt to rape had been incorrectly applied.

The Supreme Court agreed with submissions that the High Court’s interpretation did not appropriately reflect the severity and intention in the factual matrix of the incident.

During the February 10, 2026, hearing, senior advocates highlighted that judicial language must not distort or diminish the lived reality of victims, particularly in crimes of a sexual nature.

Counsel pointed out that terms such as “preparation" and “forceful penetrative sexual assault" could be confusing or misleading if applied mechanically without attention to context.

WHAT CJI KANT SAID ON JUDICIAL LANGUAGE

Reacting to these submissions, Chief Justice Surya Kant stated that the existing judicial handbook’s terms, currently too academic or foreign in orientation, cannot serve justice unless they are translated into plain language that litigants and victims can comprehend.

The Chief Justice reiterated that the goal must be clarity, dignity, and accessibility, underscoring that legal terminology should not become a barrier to justice.

“The handbook is also unfortunately too much Harvard-oriented. Dictionary assistance, we need very simple language. Common man should understand these things, even the victim’s family can understand," CJI Kant said.

He reiterated that terminology prescribed in manuals or academic texts often fails victims and their families.

“What is the right word to be chosen is the real challenge," the CJI said in court.

On whether to frame guidelines immediately, the CJI said the court would first seek a time-bound report from the National Judicial Academy, with input from domain experts and law academics.

“We will ask the National Judicial Academy to submit a time-bound report."

“Unless we dispose of the main case, the IA (Intervention Application) cannot be entertained," he said.

In response to an intervention application by the Kerala State Legal Services Authority seeking age-appropriate language for judges, the CJI stressed that first, the substantive matter involving the victim must be resolved, after which the court would move to guideline framing.

He added that judicial language must be calibrated to factual scenarios and the decency owed to victims, saying:

“Even a simplified dictionary will not be helpful. It has to be something which can even run into volumes. Work on a pan-India basis is needed."

The CJI also announced plans for periodic judicial sensitisation.

News india 'Gender Handbook Too Hardvard-Oriented': CJI Flags Need For Simpler Court Language In Assault Cases

Read More