The mere use of inappropriate language without context does not constitute an offence under IPC Sections 294(b) or 509, as intent to insult modesty must be clearly established.

ORDER :

G.Girish, J.

The petitioner, a Motor Vehicle Inspector, was booked by the Nedumangad Police, for the commission of offence under Section 294(b) and Section 509 I.P.C for the alleged act of scolding and verbally abusing a lady, during her driving test. It is alleged that, on 14.10.2022, at about 12:00 noon, while the petitioner was travelling along with the de facto complainant in her car, during the course of her driving test, he verbally abused her for arriving for the driving test without trimming her nails. According to the de facto complainant, the outrageous words uttered by the petitioner insulted her modesty, and hence he is guilty of commission of the aforesaid offences.

2. After the completion of the investigation, the S.I. of Police, Nedumangad laid the final report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangad, alleging the commission of the offences under Sections 294(b) and 509 IPC by the petitioner/accused.

3. Pursuant to the appearance of the petitioner before the learned Magistrate, he filed C.M.P No.7778/2024 seeking discharge, stating the reason that the offences alleged against him are not attracted, even if the entire allegations levelled by the prosecution are accepted as such. After hearing both sides, the learned Magistrate dismissed the above petition, as per the order passed on 18.10.2024. It is the aforesaid order, which is under challenge in this revision petition.

4. In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that he is totally innocent and that he has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner would further contend that, even if the accusations levelled by the investigating agency in the final report are accepted as such, it would not constitute the offences alleged against him.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

6. The following are the allegations levelled by the de facto complainant in her first information statement against the petitioner/accused:

The petitioner, during the course of the driving test, while both of them were inside the car driven by the de facto complainant, took note of the long nails of the de facto complainant and angrily asked whether she had come for the driving test without trimming the nails. It is further stated that the petitioner had commented that his body would become septic due to the long nails of the de facto complainant. The petitioner is also alleged to have asked the de facto complainant whether he should trim her nails. According to the de facto complainant, the petitioner made the comment that she should be taken for a bath before embarking upon the driving test. Another allegation against the petitioner is that he made the comment that certain off-springs of immoral ladies would come for driving test without brushing their teeth, taking bath and trimming their nails. When the de facto complainant told the petitioner that she is working in a bank, he is said to have angrily retorted, who had recruited her to the bank. The petitioner is also alleged to have shouted at the de facto complainant to get out of the car by referring her as the daughter of an immoral lady. He also warned the persons associated with the driving school, who were present there, against bringing such ladies for the driving test.

7. As regards the offence under Section 294(b) I.P.C, it has to be stated that the aforesaid section is apparently not attracted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, since the incident is said to have taken place inside a car which was in motion. It cannot be said that the private space inside the above car where the accused allegedly uttered the abusive words,