The absence of physical contact negates the applicability of IPC Section 354A(1)(i) while maintaining charges under Sections 354(1)(iv) and 509.

ORDER

Dated this the 12^th day of March, 2026 The accused in C.C. No. 984 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-l, Hosdurg, arising out of Crime No. 1627 of 2022 of Hosdurg police station, filed this Crl.M.C. under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 354A , 354(1)(i), 354(1)(iv) and 509 of the IPC . 2. The prosecution case is that on 21.10.2022 at about 9.30 a.m., the accused who was working as a Pediatric Surgeon in Government District Hospital, Kanjangad, after knowing that the defacto complainant is a graduate in Hindi, asked the Hindi words for ‘vagina’, ‘penis’ and ‘clitoris’ with sexual intent and thereby insulted the modesty of the defacto complainant.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the allegations levelled against the petitioner do not make out the offences as alleged.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The petition was strongly opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. Though notice was served on the 3^rd respondent/ defacto complainant, she did not turn up.

6. The defacto complainant was a first year nursing student who was deputed for duty in the hospital where the petitioner was working as Pediatric Surgeon. It is alleged that he had asked the corresponding Hindi words for the words ‘vagina’, ‘penis’ and ‘clitoris’ with sexual intent. Since the words spoken by the petitioner to the defacto complainant are obscene words and since he had asked those words to the defacto complainant out of context, the same will prima facie amount to the offences punishable under Sections 354(1)(iv) and 509 of the IPC .

7. As argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the above allegations do not make out the offence under Section 354A (1)(i), as there was no physical contact or advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures.

Therefore, this Crl.M.C. is liable to be allowed in part as follows: the charge under Section 354A (1)(i) is quashed and the prayer for quashing the charges under Sections 354A (1)(iv) and 509 of the IPC is rejected.