SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Bom) 328

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
T.V. NALAWADE & M.G. SEWLIKAR, JJ.
Nivrutti s/o Hariram Gaikwad - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer and Ors - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 557 of 2018
Decided On : 11-03-2020

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Shri. Shambhuraje V. Deshmukh, Advocate
For the Respondent:Shri R.D. Sanap, A.P.P. Shri.Kiran Nagarkar Advocate h/f, Smt. Smita S. Kulkarni, Advocate

The main legal point established is that sending personal messages on WhatsApp does not constitute utterance of obscene words in a public place under Section 294 of the IPC, but insulting a woman's modesty through such messages may still constitute an offense under Section 509.

Headnote:

Obscene Messages - Insulting the Modesty of a Woman - Section 294, 500, 506, 507, 509 IPC

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner is accused of sending obscene and insulting messages to his wife via WhatsApp, leading to the filing of an F.I.R. under Sections 294, 500, 506, and 507 of the Indian Penal Code.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that while the messages did not constitute an offense under Section 294 of the IPC, they did prima facie indicate an offense under Section 509, which pertains to insulting the modesty of a woman.

Issues: The main issue was whether the messages sent via WhatsApp constituted an offense under Section 294 of the IPC and if the offense under Section 509 was made out.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that sending personal messages on WhatsApp did not amount to utterance of obscene words in a public place under Section 294. However, the messages calling the woman a prostitute were deemed to insult her modesty, potentially falling under Section 509.

Final Decision: The F.I.R. was quashed to the extent of Section 294 of the IPC, but the prosecution was allowed to investigate whether the offense under Section 509 was made out.

JUDGMENT :

M.G. SEWLIKAR, J.

1. This petition is fled under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the F.I.R.

2. Facts giving rise to this petition are that the respondent No. 2 is the wife of the petitioner. She married petitioner on 14.5.2017. After marriage, the petitioner did not treat the respondent No. 2 well. He would beat her and would call her a prostitute and that she earns money by doing business of prostitution. It is further alleged that the petitioner married the respondent No. 2 for the sake of others as the petitioner is homosexual. On 1st January, 2018, the petitioner called her up and abused her in filthy language. Again on 27th and 28th February, 2018, he sent WhatsApp message to the respondent No. 2 calling her prostitute and that she earns money by doing business of prostitution. It is further alleged that the petitioner had made phone calls to his relatives also. Accordingly, she fled an F.I.R. on 5.3.2018 on the basis of which offence under Sections 294, 500, 506 and 507 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered against the petitioner.

3. Heard Shri. Shambhuraje V. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the Petitioner Shri R.D. Sanap, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1/ State and Shri. Kiran Nagarkar Advocate h/f, Smt. Smita S. Kulkarni learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2.

4. Shri Deshmukh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that offence under Section 294 of the I.P.C. will be attracted only if the obscene words are uttered in public place and that the obscene words should be of such a nature as to cause annoyance to others. He submitted that the WhatsApp messages are personal messages. Therefore sending of personal messages on personal account of WhatsApp will not amount to utterance of words at public place. He submitted that the alleged messages have not been sent on WhatsApp group.

5. Shri Sanap, the learned A.P.P. for respondent State submitted that the messages sent on personal account on WhatsApp, amounts to utterance of obscene words in public place. Therefore, offence under Section 294 of the I.P.C. is made out.

6. Section 500 and 506 of the I.P.C. are non cognizable ofences.

7. Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code read as under :-

“Section 294 IPC - Whoever, to the annoyance of others – (a) does any obscene act in any public place, or (b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both."

Section 294 of the I.P.C. requires that a) act done must be an obscene act and it must be done in any public place. Sub Section (b) of Section 294 of I.P.C. can be pressed into service if any one sings, recites or utters any word, song, ballad words, near any public place and Section 294 further requires that such obscene acts, song, ballad or utterance of words cause annoyance to others.

8. Thus, the essential ingredients of Section 294 of the I.P.C. are the commission of obscene act at public place. The public place has not been defined in the I.P.C. The Black's Law Dictionary defines public place as under :

“Any location that the local, state, or national government maintains for the use of public, such as a highway, park, or public building.”

9. In the case at hand, there is no utterance of words in any public place but the alleged obscene messages are sent on social media i.e. WhatsApp. The respondent No. 2 has alleged that the messages are uploaded on Facebook. The compilation produced by the respondent No. 2 shows that those are the WhatsApp messages and are not the messages uploaded on Facebook. WhatsApp messages sent on personal accounts are strictly personal. Nobody has access to those messages except the sender and the receiver. The literature in this regard is published on the WhatsApp Website i.e. Sttps://www.whatsapp.com/security/, it reads as und

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top