Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Jignesh Mevani @ Jignesh N. Mevani S/o Natwar Lal Parmar – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This matter is specially assigned to this Bench by Hon’ble the Chief Justice in terms of the direction of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Union of India , 2023 SCC Online SC 1463, as the petitioner herein is a Legislator.
2. Heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. S. Borthakur, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Public Prosecutor (PP), Assam, for the respondents.
3. The present petition is filed under Section 482 CrPC, seeking quashment of an order dated 19.09.2023 passed in P.R.C. No. 900/2022 by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, whereby charges were framed against the petitioner under Sections 352 /354 IPC .
4. The facts in nutshell are that, on 21.04.2022, the petitioner was arrested in connection with Kokrajhar P.S. Case No.183/2022 registered under Sections 120 (B)/153(A)/295(A)/504/505(1)(b) (c)(2) IPC read with Section 66 of the Information Technology (I.T.) Act, 2000.
5. During police custody in connection with the aforementioned case, he was again shown to have been arrested on 26.04.2022 by Barpeta Road Police in connection with Barpeta Road Police Case N
Charges under Section 354 IPC cannot be sustained without evidence demonstrating intent to outrage modesty; however, a charge under Section 352 IPC was upheld based on allegations of using criminal f....
The court emphasized that charges must be framed with precision, highlighting the absence of essential elements for IPC Section 354 and the need to consider dissemination under Section 354-C and IT A....
The court upheld the conviction under Section 354 IPC, concluding that the appellant's actions constituted an outrage of modesty, supported by the victim's testimony and corroborating evidence.
At the time of framing charge, the court is to form a reasonable presumption regarding commission of the offences by the accused on the basis of prima facie materials on record.
The court established that at the charge framing stage, a strong suspicion of guilt suffices to proceed, without requiring proof of the allegations.
Summoning of an accused under IPC Section 354 requires clear evidence; unexplained delays and lack of corroborating witnesses render allegations insufficient.
The court established that political protests do not justify claims of wrongful restraint or assault unless the essential ingredients of the offences are met.
The intention to outrage modesty under Section 354 IPC can only be determined after a full trial, especially when counter FIRs exist.
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
