Trying to Talk to a Woman Doesn’t Amount to Outraging Modesty: HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) has said that attempts made by a person to talk to a stranger woman could be unwelcome or annoying but do not constitute a crime of outraging modesty.

 

The HC bench of Justice Kirti Singh ordered quashing of an FIR registered against Gaurav Khatri in Rohtak in July 2020, while clarifying that to constitute an offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, criminal force must be applied against the woman, and such force must be with the intent to outrage her modesty.

 

“To the considered mind of this court, the said act (petitioner’s act), though can be seen as annoying and unwelcome, cannot be said to be such as to shock the sense of decency of a woman,” the court observed.

 

The petitioner had approached HC in 2024 challenging the charges framed against him under Section 354 of IPC, which deals with assault or use of criminal force with intent to outrage modesty. He had also sought quashing of the FIR. Section 354 of IPC carries up to five years’ imprisonment.

 

The allegations were that Khatri, along with another person, entered the library of PGIMS Rohtak, misbehaved with a lady doctor, and allegedly outraged her modesty. The matter was looked into by the internal sexual harassment committee, which recommended registration of an FIR.

 

In HC, the petitioner submitted that he was pursuing a medical programme from a Russian university, along with his friend, and had visited the library of PGIMS, Rohtak. The petitioner had only greeted the prosecutrix and tried to initiate a conversation; on being declined, he left the premises. Hence, the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC were not made out.

 

His lawyer asserted that at no point were allegations of assault or use of criminal force levelled against the petitioner. The prosecutrix, in her testimony before the trial court, stated that she had no complaint against him. Hence, the essentials constituting an offence under Section 354 IPC, even prima facie, were absent, and continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law, his lawyer submitted.

 

Referring to the statement recorded by the woman before the trial court, the court observed that it was the prosecutrix’s own admission that the petitioner only tried initiating a conversation and left when refused. “Given the facts and circumstances, as ascertained from the FIR and statements of the prosecutrix, especially when the record is silent on any use of criminal force by the petitioner, even prima facie, the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC are not made out,” the court said while quashing the FIR.