Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for State Of Punjab VS Major Singh...
State Of Punjab VS Major Singh - 1966 0 Supreme(SC) 145 : The court held that an act of interfering with the vagina of a seven-and-a-half-month-old child constitutes an offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, as it is ''''clearly suggestive of sex according to the common notions of mankind,'''' regardless of whether the child''''s modesty was personally felt. The court rejected the test of the victim''''s individual reaction and instead adopted a standard based on societal norms, ruling that such acts fall within the mischief of Section 354 even when the victim is too young to comprehend the nature of the act.Checking relevance for DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE VS S. SAMUTHIRAM...
Checking relevance for ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA VS SATISH...
Checking relevance for Tarkeshwar Sahu VS State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)...
Checking relevance for Aman Kumar VS State Of Haryana...
Aman Kumar VS State Of Haryana - 2004 2 Supreme 5 : The act of catching a girl''''s hand, when coupled with other actions such as pulling her, removing her dress, and making requests for sexual intercourse, can constitute an outrage to her modesty under Section 354 IPC. The essence of a woman''''s modesty is her sex, and the culpable intention of the accused is the crux of the matter. The act of pulling a woman and removing her dress, along with a request for sexual intercourse, is such as would be an outrage to the modesty of a woman, and knowledge that modesty is likely to be outraged is sufficient to constitute the offence under Section 354 IPC, even without a deliberate intention to outrage modesty alone. This is particularly relevant when the accused''''s conduct shows a determination to gratify their passions, regardless of resistance.Checking relevance for Apparel Export Promotion Council VS A. K. Chopra...
Checking relevance for Deepak Singh @ Dipak Singh VS State Of West Bengal...
Deepak Singh @ Dipak Singh VS State Of West Bengal - 2025 0 Supreme(Cal) 44 : In the case of Bishewhwar Murmu v. State, the court held that when an accused caught hold of the hand of a victim and the victim raised an alarm, the act constituted an offence under Section 354 IPC for outraging the modesty of the woman, even though the offence under Section 376/511 (rape) was not made out. The conviction was converted to Section 354 based on the act of catching the hand, which was deemed sufficient to outrage modesty when considered in context.Checking relevance for Ravindra S/o Laxman Narete vs State of Maharashtra...
Checking relevance for Biju Abraham Abraham John VS State of Kerala...
Checking relevance for Chandra Kanta Jana VS State of West Bengal...
Chandra Kanta Jana VS State of West Bengal - 2024 0 Supreme(Cal) 559 : The act of catching the hand of a girl, as described in the case of Bishewhwar Murmu v. State, constitutes an offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code when it is part of a broader act intended to outrage her modesty. In that case, the court held that when the accused caught hold of the victim''''s hand and the victim raised an alarm, the offence under Section 376/511 was not made out, but the conviction was converted to one under Section 354 for outraging the modesty of the victim. This establishes that even a single act like catching a girl''''s hand, when done with intent to outrage her modesty and in a context of threatening or coercive behavior, can amount to an offence under Section 354 IPC.Checking relevance for Sujit Mondal VS State of West Bengal...
Sujit Mondal VS State of West Bengal - 2024 0 Supreme(Cal) 213 : The act of catching the hand of a girl, if done with the intention to outrage her modesty or with knowledge that it is likely to outrage her modesty, constitutes an offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. The Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Major Singh held that the essence of a woman''''s modesty is her sex, and the culpable intention of the accused is the crux of the matter. The reaction of the woman is relevant but not always decisive. In Bishewhwar Murmu v. State, the court held that catching hold of the hand of a victim, when accompanied by alarm and fear, could constitute an offence under Section 354 IPC if it was part of a larger act intended to outrage modesty. The ultimate test is whether the action is capable of shocking the sense of decency of a woman. Therefore, catching the hand of a girl can amount to an offence under Section 354 IPC if it is done with the requisite intent or knowledge.
