APPLICATION OF THE MISCHIEF RULE IN ATTORNEY

GENERAL FOR INDIA V. SATISH

ELI 5 : Three rules of statutory
interpretation
1) Plain meaning - look at the exact
wording of the statute, irrespective
of the consequence
2) Golden rule - if there is an absurd
result due to the application of 1),
look at the spirit of the law
3) Mischief Rule - suppress mischief,
advance remedy - figure out
legislative intent

Raunak Rai Maini (1929) & Vipashyana Hilsayan (1959)

BACKDROP OF THE CASE
TL;DR
Material Facts:

1. The accused deceptively took

the 12 year old prosecutrix to
his house in the absence of her
parents.
2. He then pressed her breast,

+Sexual Intent
tried to remove her salwar and Interpretational Issue
2 Limbs of Sexual
pressed her mouth when she Assault under s.7
resisted. Whether "touching" or "physical
3. The prosecutrix was rescued contact" requires direct touching(skin- > "touch"- sexual organs

by her mother from a latched to-skin) or will indirect touching (via

>"physical contact"
room. clothes etc.) suffice? without penetration

2
INGREDIENTS OF THE MISCHIEF RULE

4 Point Formula:

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Law Before the Act
Section 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D & Section 351

Failed to specifically address sexual offences against

Mischief/Defect
children

POCSO, 2012
Remedy
Chapter II, III

Based on the legislative intent, sexual assault in Section 7

Construction by the Judges
cannot be restricted to skin- to-skin contact
COURT'S APPLICATION OF THE
RULE