The Allahabad High Court has held that undressing a woman with intent to commit rape—even if intercourse does not occur due to her resistance — squarely falls within the scope of “attempt to rape” under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Justice Rajnish Kumar made the observation while upholding the conviction and 10-year sentence of Pradeep Kumar, also known as Pappu and Bhuriya, who was found guilty of kidnapping a minor girl (aged around 16–18 years), confining her for nearly 20 days, and attempting to rape her in 2004.

As per the prosecution, the victim was forcibly abducted in a Maruti van and confined at the house of the accused’s relative. During this period, the accused undressed her and tried to sexually assault her, but failed to penetrate due to her strong protest.

The Court found the victim’s statements under Section 164 CrPC and her testimony before the trial court to be credible and consistent. Relying on precedents, including the Supreme Court’s decision in Pandharinath v. State of Maharashtra (2009), the High Court held that removal of clothes in such context clearly constitutes an attempt to rape.

The bench also referred to the High Court’s earlier ruling in Israil v. State of U.P., observing that once preparations are complete and an act is undertaken with the intent to commit rape, the offence of attempt stands established.

“It has been proved by the prosecution that the victim was forcibly kidnapped with the intent to marry and have intercourse. He not only outraged her modesty but also attempted rape by undressing her. However, due to her protest, he failed to complete the act,” the Court remarked.

The Court dismissed the accused’s argument that the delay in filing the FIR weakened the prosecution’s case, finding the delay properly explained. It also rejected claims that the accused had been falsely implicated due to enmity, stating that no evidence had been provided in support of such a claim.

Accordingly, the Court upheld the trial court’s order convicting the appellant under Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping with intent to compel marriage), 376/511 (attempt to rape), and 354 (outraging modesty) of the IPC, and dismissed the appeal.

Case Title: Pradeep Kumar @ Pappu @ Bhuriya v. State of U.P.

Counsel: Advocate Ashutosh Singh (Amicus) for the appellant; AGA Badrul Hasan for the State.