An Advocate is protected by legal privilege for statements made during court proceedings, provided there is no proven malice or intent to insult modesty, as established under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 79 - Quashing of F.I.R. - An Advocate sought to quash an F.I.R. alleging insult of modesty during remand proceedings - The court held that an Advocate's statements made in the course of a duty are protected by legal privilege. (Paras 14, 20, 24)

(B) Criminal law - Insult to modesty - Intent to insult is crucial; mere utterance in course of duty does not constitute an offence under Section 79. (Paras 14, 18, 22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was accused of insulting the modesty of a woman during court proceedings while defending his client implicated in a cheating case tied to financial disputes. The complainant alleged the Advocate made defamatory statements about her character in an open court.

Findings of Court:
The court found no prima facie evidence of intention to insult the woman’s modesty, emphasizing the privilege enjoyed by the Advocate in making statements during judicial proceedings.

Issues: The core issue was whether the statements made by the Advocate under his professional capacity constituted an offence under Section 79.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the utterances lacked the required intent for prosecution under the relevant legal provisions, granting immunity to the Advocate for his actions during the case.

Result: Petition granted; F.I.R. quashed.

JUDGMENT

(Per Bharati Dangre, J.) :-

1. By the Petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner, who is an Advocate by profession, seek quashing of F.I.R. No.455 of 2024 registered with Panvel Town Police Station on 20/07/2024, invoking Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the Petition is taken up for final hearing.

We have heard learned senior counsel Mr.Manoj Mohite for the Petitioner alongwith Advocate Saurabh Butala and Advocate Harshad Sathe, whereas the Respondent/State is represented by the learned A.P.P. Ms.Sharmila S. Kaushik. Respondent No.2 is represented by Ms.Shajia Bano Mohammad Shoeb. The Investigating Officer from Panvel City Police Station, Shri.Rajendra Ghevadekar is also present before us with necessary papers, which we have retained with us.

3. Before we adjudicate upon the rival contentions raised before us, we must refer to the brief background in which subject C.R. came to be registered .

On 29/04/2024, an F.I.R. came to be registered by Khandeshwar Police Station on the complaint filed by Respondent No.3, by arraigning one Santosh Koli, Vaishali Koli, Chaitanya Koli and one Krishna Milan Shukla as accused, by alleging that by giving false promise of handsome returns, the accused persons have collected huge sum of money and they have cheated the Complainant alongwith Respondent No.2 as well as one more lady named therein. It was alleged that collectively the victims were duped in the sum of Rs.2,74,87,047.20 and it was alleged that the amount was misappropriated by preparing forged documents.

The said C.R. invoked Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC against the four accused persons and it was alleged that the amount was transferred to the accused through cheques, on-line transfer and some amount was also paid in cash.

In connection with the said offence, accused-Vaishali Koli was arrested and the services of the Petitioner were engaged by her to represent her in the remand proceedings.

4. In the Petition, it is specifically pleaded that Vaishali Koli is running a Firm-VSK Group, which is engaged in the business of real estate and the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 alongwith other women invested money in her firm voluntarily, as she had assured them handsome returns, but since the business was disrupted on account of unforeseen contingencies, she could not regularly return their investment and she was continuously harassed for return of their money by Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

Her husband, Santosh Koli, transferred his flat at Sukapur in the name of Mrs.Savita Shende, one of the investors, and, therefore, Respondent No.2 was continuously harassing Vaishali Koli to transfer her land at Roha in her name and she accompanied with Respondent No.3, visited house of Vaishali on 29/02/2024 and threatened her to return their money and exerted influence by saying that they have good connections in Police Department and also with Ministers.

5. Santosh Koli, husband of Vaishali, forwarded on-line complaint on 03/03/2024 to Khandeshwar Police Station against Respondent No.2, where he gave the brief background of the investment made in the company-VSK Group belonging to his wife and specifically made reference to Respondent Nos.2 and 3 along with one more woman. He also stated that the investment made by them in the company was returned from time to time, but in the previous year, since the Company was running through a rough phase, she was not regular in paying the returns and, therefore, she was in depression and was required to be admitted in the hospital on two occasions.

He provided the details of the harassment faced by his wife from the Respondents and also averred that his wife attempted to commit suicide, being fed up of their harassment. He also referred to the financial difficulties faced by them as a family and al

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 8257

An Advocate is protected by legal privilege for statements made during court proceedings, provided there is no proven malice or intent to insult modesty, as established under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Login now and unlock premium legal research