LI Network
Published on: January 2, 2024 at 14:53 IST
The Bombay High Court ruled that following and verbally abusing a woman multiple times does not constitute behavior that shocks the sense of her decency, indicating that such actions do not warrant invoking Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The decision was made by the Nagpur Bench in response to a criminal revision application filed by an individual challenging a Sessions Court judgment that upheld his conviction.
Justice Anil L. Pansare stated, “In the present case, all that has been done by the applicant is that he has on a bicycle given a push to P.W. 1 while she was going to the market. According to P.W. 1, the applicant had earlier followed her couple of times and abused her. … As regards following and abusing P.W. 1, the said act cannot be said to be capable of shocking the sense of decency of a woman. The act may be annoying but definitely would not shock the sense of decency of a woman.”
The High Court held that the lower courts erred in finding the applicant guilty under Section 354 IPC.
In this instance, the Magistrate convicted the applicant under Section 354 IPC, sentencing him to two years of rigorous imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs. 2,000.
The incident was reported by three witnesses, one of whom testified that the incident occurred near Bombaywala Medical Stores. The victim mentioned that the applicant followed her and used abusive language.
On the day of the incident, while the victim was heading to the market, the applicant, on a bicycle, nudged her, causing annoyance. The victim retaliated by hitting him. This evidence was used by the lower courts to convict him under Section 354 IPC, which pertains to actions that outrage women’s modesty and privacy.
The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s view on the essence of a woman’s modesty and highlighted that the actions must be capable of shocking the sense of a woman’s decency to determine if modesty has been violated.
Examining the applicant’s conduct, the Court emphasized the act of nudging the victim while she rode her bicycle. It clarified that the applicant did not touch her inappropriately or target any specific part of her body that could lead to embarrassment.
The Court concluded that although the act was offensive or annoying, it did not compromise the decency of a woman. The absence of additional evidence to establish the applicant’s guilt led the Court to find the witness’s statement insufficient to meet the criteria of Section 354 IPC.
Consequently, the High Court accepted the revision application and acquitted the applicant.