Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
Dr. Malabika Bhattacharjee – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 1441 & 1443 of 2020
Decided On : 15-05-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 509 – Criminal procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Quash of Criminal proceedings/FIR– Word, Act intended to insult the modesty of a woman – Allegations brought about by way of a written complaint lodged by Opposite party inter alia effect that she joined College in capacity of a Lecturer Petitioner is presently Head – Held, Court keeping in mind future of children students who are taught by petitioner hopes that her conduct shall be more professional and focused on building future of students she has been entrusted with which requires time dedication and above all being a shining example lighting path of her students career while guiding them in building their bright future remembered along with one parent and can make or break career and life – Applications disposed of.
Key Points: - The court quashed Kasba Police Station Case Nos. 355 of 2020 and 323 of 2020 under Section 509 IPC, and stayed/disposed of related proceedings. [9000473200038] - The judgment discusses the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 509 IPC, including intent to insult modesty, words/sounds/gestures, and targeting the woman to be heard/seen. (!) (!) (!) - It distinguishes between merely insulting a woman and insulting the modesty of a woman, stating that insult to modesty is required for Section 509 IPC. [9000473200029][9000473200031] - The complainant struck out the words "outraging my modesty" from her complaint, which affects the essential ingredient of outraging modesty. [9000473200013] (!) - The court found that the alleged words and the context did not prima facie constitute the offence, leading to quashing. [9000473200035] - Observes that the First Information Report is the sheet anchor of prosecution; absence of material particulars may justify quashing. [9000473200015] - The court emphasizes future consideration for students/teaching environment in its disposal. [9000473200036]
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the First Information Report being Kasba Police Station Case No. 355 of 2020 and 323 of 2020 dated September 09, 2020 and September 19, 2020 respectively under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 corresponding to ACGR No. 3994 of 2020 and ACGR No. 4073 of 2020 pending before the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Alipore, South 24 Parganas.
2. The petitioner’s case is that she is presently the Head of the Department of Zoology, Vivekananda College, Thakurpukur, situated at 269, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata-700063 and since 2006 has been discharging her duties as the Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology.
3. The allegations brought about by way of a written complaint lodged by the Opposite party No. 2 are inter alia to the effect that she joined the said College in the capacity of a Lecturer in 2005 in the Zoology Department of which the Petitioner is presently the Head. The Opposite Party No. 2 has claimed to have acted in the capacity of the Head of the Department, Zoology in the said college till 2015. The Opposite Party No. 2 that is Dr. Senjuti Roy Mukherjee, apart from being an Associate Professor in the said College, is also an amateur Theatre artist and she regularly performs in Theatres and advertisements. Allegedly, ever since the Petitioner had assumed the charge of the Head of the Department of Zoology in March, 2018 she has insulted the Opposite Party No. 2 on multiple occasions. During the lockdown, the Opposite Party No. 2 had organized an international webinar and a theatre appreciation course on behalf of the said college but the students of Zoology were discouraged to join the course. The Opposite Party No. 2 however kept quiet but her silence was taken to be her weakness. It was then brought to the notice of the Opposite Party No. 2 that the Petitioner had posted a defamatory and allegedly lascivious photograph of the Opposite Party No. 2 along with an abusive comment in a Whatsapp group comprising of around fifty students. The Opposite Party No. 2 admitted that the said photograph was taken from the climax scene of one of the plays played by the Opposite Party No. 2 namely ‘Medea’ where the female character “Medea” is depicted as a physically and mentally shattered lady in torn clothes. The said group was immediately dissolved after the incident to conceal evidence and has been replaced by a new group. The said incident which took place on August 15, 2020 was allegedly intended to vilify and defame the Opposite Party No. 2.
4. Apparently some unknown person had extracted the picture in question and added a tagline apropos the protagonist played by Dr. Senjuti Roy Mukherjee in “Medea” and the same was uploaded few months back and shared in various Whatsapp groups including in groups of which the Petitioner is part of. Had it not been the sheer ulterior motive of Dr. Senjuti Roy Mukherjee to willfully harass the Petitioner, she would have taken it as a flattering remark for luminously portraying her character “Medea”.
5. Further, she would have taken notice of the picture in question right since the same was uploaded and shared in various social medial platforms as aforesaid, for being obscene or crude or obnoxious or being sexually coloured from any corner as alleged in her complaint, however on the contrary Dr. Senjuti Roy Mukherjee herself has got the picture tagged in her personal Facebook account and further shared the picture for further promotion.
6. The Mandamus Appeal filed by the petitioner being MAT 604 of 2014 was allowed by the Hon’ble Division Bench and vide order dated 18.09.2014, the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to quash the entire disciplinary proceeding initiated against the petitioner and consequently, the suspension order which was issued to the petitioner.
7. That even after the disciplinary proceeding and the consequential suspension order was quashed b
The court established that defamation claims require clear intent to harm, and the absence of such intent, along with applicable exceptions, can lead to quashing of proceedings.
The court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner due to lack of prima facie evidence and findings of mala fide intent behind the allegations.
The court affirmed that actions undermining a woman's modesty, such as public defamation, are serious offences under the IPC, warranting legal action regardless of procedural technicalities.
The absence of specific intent or evidence in harassment allegations under Section 509 IPC, reinforced by prior exoneration, necessitates quashing of criminal proceedings.
Allegations of stalking and obscenity must meet legal thresholds of intent and evidence; mere accusations without substantiation are insufficient for prosecution.
Legal proceedings can be quashed if they are established to be maliciously instituted without sufficient evidence, causing an abuse of judicial process.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
