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

2023 Supreme(Bom) 909

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Bharati Dangre, J.
Mayur – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Revision Application No. 49 of 2022
Decided On : 10-02-2023

Advocates appeared:
Amol Hunge, Advocate, V.A.Thakre, Advocate

The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity to prove the accused's specific intention to outrage the modesty of the victim and the lack of sexual intent in the accused's actions under Sec. 354 of the IPC.

Headnote:

IPC - Outraging Modesty - Sec. 451, Sec. 354 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Sec. 451, Sec. 354 - The court discussed the elements of Sec. 354 and Sec. 451 of the IPC, emphasizing the necessity to establish assault or criminal force for the offence under Sec. 354 and the requirement of house trespass with the intention to commit an offence for Sec. 451. The court highlighted the importance of establishing the accused's intention to outrage the modesty of the victim and the lack of sexual intent in the impromptu action. The court also considered the accused's age and antecedents in its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved the accused being convicted for offences under Sec. 451 and Sec. 354 of the IPC based on an incident where he entered the victim's house and made inappropriate remarks and gestures towards her. The court analyzed the evidence and inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's specific intention to outrage the modesty of the victim and the lack of sexual intent in the accused's actions. It also considered the accused's age and antecedents, ultimately setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower courts.

Issues: The key issues revolved around the establishment of the accused's intention to outrage the modesty of the victim and the interpretation of the elements of Sec. 451 and Sec. 354 of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of specific intention to outrage the modesty of the victim, the absence of sexual intent in the accused's actions, and the consideration of the accused's age and antecedents.

Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower courts, allowing the revision and granting the applicant continued liberty.

JUDGMENT

1. The present Revision Application is preferred by the applicant being aggrieved by the concurrent finding rendered by the JMFC, Vardha in Regular Criminal Case No. 175/2012 and by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Vardha in Criminal Appeal No. 93/2016. By the impugned judgments, the applicant stand convicted for the offence punishable u/s.451 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for four months and to pay fine of Rs.1, 000.00, in default to suffer RI for one month. Apart, he is also convicted for the offence punishable u/s.354 of IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for six months and to pay fine of Rs.2, 000.00, in default, to suffer RI for two months. The sentence of Imprisonment being directed to run concurrently, the fine was directed to be paid to the prosecutrix.

2. Heard learned counsel Mr.Amol Hunge for the Applicant and learned APP Mr.Thakare for the State. The incident reported by PW 1 Jayshree Sanjay Chore which is alleged to have taken place on 15/3/2012 at around 1.30 p.m in her house, resulted in registration of C.R.No. 95/2012 which invoke Sec. 451 and 354 of the IPC. It was informed by PW 1, mother of the victim girl, aged 12-13 years, that while her daughter was all alone at home, the accused entered in the house on the pretext of handing over documents of R.D and though her daughter objected to his entry by protesting that her mother was not at home, he gained entry into the house and asked for drinking water. When the victim offered him water, he sat next to her, rolled his hand over her back and head and uttered the words "you have grown up so much". This scared the victim and she shouted for help, when PW 3 and PW 5, residing in the neighborhood came to her rescue and called the persons in the neighborhood. The applicant/accused was caught hold of, and the informant PW 1 was called home. According to her, she visited his place and tried to make him understand the gravity of the situation, but when he threatened that they are at liberty to take whatever steps they want to, she lodged a report in the police station in Wardha city. The complaint resulted in invoking Sec. 451 and 354 of the IPC against the accused.

3. To establish its case, the prosecution examined eight witnesses and the accused was also examined u/s.313 of the Cr.P.C where he denied the case of the prosecution, but specifically took a stand that the mother of the victim owed some money to his mother and on death of his mother, when he demanded the money back, he was falsely prosecuted.

4. With the able assistance of the respective counsel, I have perused the evidence placed before the Magistrate during the course of trial. PW 1, the complainant, deposed that she was in her office, at the time when the incident took place, when her daughter aged 12-13 years was all alone at home and when her husband asked her to reach home, she rushed back, to find several people having gathered there. They had caught hold of the accused and she found her daughter whimpering, who informed her that accused had visited the house on the pretext of handing over some papers. She was told that he entered the house on pretext of handing over the papers, and he inquired about the mobile number of her mother. She was informed by her daughter that he entered the house and sat on a chair and asked for water. She offered him water and sat on the diwan (bed) and came next to her when she stood up. At that time, he moved his hand on her back and expressed that she had grown up. As per PW 1, being frightened, she shouted, when PW 5 rushed to her house and took the keys of the vehicle of the accused and called her husband. As per this witness, the accused could not leave the place as the persons in the neighborhood caught hold of him. However, when PW 1 reached the spot, she asked people to free him since she was acquainted with his mother, as she was having R.D with her. According to PW 1, she went to his house to caution him and also tried to have a dialogue with him, but on the

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