Saying ‘I love you’ Is An Expression Of Feelings, Need Not Have Sexual Intent: Bombay HC

Bombay High Court

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has acquitted a 35-year-old man who was convicted for allegedly molesting a 17-year-old girl in 2015, ruling that merely saying “I love you” does not amount to sexual intent or constitute sexual harassment in the absence of further incriminating behavior.

Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, while setting aside the lower court’s conviction, emphasized that an expression of love, on its own, does not meet the legal threshold for sexual harassment or molestation.

In her judgment, Justice Joshi-Phalke noted, “Words expressed ‘I love you’ would not by itself amount to sexual intent as contemplated by the legislature.” She further clarified that for an act to qualify as sexual in nature, there must be evidence of inappropriate touching, forcible disrobing, or indecent gestures or remarks made with a clear intent to insult the modesty of a woman.

The Court concluded that there was no indication in the case record to suggest the accused’s real intention was to establish sexual contact with the minor girl.

Background Of The Case

According to the prosecution, the incident took place in Nagpur in 2015, when the then-17-year-old girl was returning home from school. The accused allegedly approached her, held her hand, asked for her name, and said ‘I love you’. The girl managed to walk away and later informed her father, who subsequently filed a police complaint.

In 2017, a sessions court convicted the accused under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, sentencing him to three years’ imprisonment.

No Evidence of Sexual Intent: HC

The High Court, however, found that the evidence did not support a finding of sexual harassment or molestation. “There should be something more to suggest that the real intention behind saying ‘I love you’ was to drag the angle of sex,” the Court observed.

Citing the definition of sexual harassment and molestation, the judge emphasized that the law is meant to punish behavior with explicit sexual undertones or actions, not mere verbal expressions of affection or attraction in the absence of threatening or inappropriate conduct.

Legal Implications

The verdict underscores the importance of establishing intent in criminal cases involving molestation or sexual harassment. The Court reiterated that expressions of love or attraction, without coercion, physical contact, or indecent behavior, do not automatically constitute a criminal offence under sexual misconduct laws.

The ruling is likely to influence how courts interpret verbal conduct in sensitive cases, particularly those involving minors, while balancing the need for protection of women and children with safeguards against misapplication of the law.