-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
In a recent judgment , Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma clarified the legal intricacies surrounding Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with “outraging the modesty of a woman.” The court emphasized that the “culpable intention of the accused” is the pivotal factor in determining whether an act outrages a woman’s modesty.
The case involved an employee at HDFC Life Insurance who accused her superior of using derogatory language against her. The court set aside the impugned order from the Trial Court, stating that the term “Gandi Aurat” (dirty woman) used by the accused did not meet the criteria for outraging the modesty of a woman under Section 509 IPC.
Justice Sharma elaborated on the concept of “modesty of women,” describing it as a “set of culturally and socially defined behaviors, manners, and dress codes intended to preserve a woman’s sense of privacy, decency, and dignity.” The judgment further clarified that the interpretation of what constitutes an outrage to modesty can be “context-specific,” depending on societal norms, cultural values, and individual perspectives.
The court also outlined a test for determining whether an act outrages the modesty of a woman, emphasizing that the “reaction of the woman involved is relevant but not always conclusive.” The judgment has been hailed as a significant step in clarifying the legal framework surrounding the issue, providing much-needed guidance for future cases.
The case referred to previous judgments, including Ram Kripal v. State of MP, to support its decision. The court concluded by emphasizing the need for a balanced judicial perspective and noted that the accused should have been more courteous in his behavior.
Date of Decision: August 28, 2023
VARUN BHATIA vs STATE AND ANOTHER
[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Varun_Bhatia_vs_State_And_Another_on_28_August_2023_DelHC.pdf"]
