Pulling Woman's Hand Not Offence If Criminal Intent Not Proven: High Court
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has acquitted a man convicted in 2018 for allegedly molesting a mentally challenged woman, holding that merely pulling a woman's hand - without clear proof of intent - does not automatically constitute the offence.
Justice RN Manjula made the observation while allowing the appeal of Murugesan, who had been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment by a lower court under Section 354 IPC.
The prosecution alleged that on May 4, 2015, the accused, from the Hindu Maravar community, pulled the hand of a Scheduled Caste woman grazing cattle near Nedunkulam Channel and abused her by her caste. The trial court had acquitted him under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act but convicted him for outraging modesty.
On appeal, the High Court pointed to contradictions in witness accounts and the inability of the victim to testify due to her mental condition. The key eyewitness gave inconsistent statements, sometimes claiming she saw the incident, and at other times admitting she arrived after the accused had left.
Citing Supreme Court precedents, Justice Manjula said that to attract Section 354 IPC, the act must be accompanied by the intention to outrage modesty, proven through clear and credible evidence. Pulling a woman's hand could shock the sense of decency, the court noted, but without proof of intent, vague or generalised statements cannot sustain a conviction.
The court extended the benefit of doubt to Murugesan, overturned the conviction, and ordered the refund of any fine paid.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- Indian Express
CJI not superior to other SC judges, has same judicial powers: Justice Gavai
The Chief Justice of India is not superior to other judges of the Supreme Court and exercises the same judicial powers as the rest, Chief Justice B R Gavai said on Tuesday. The CJI made the observation as a three-judge bench, presided by him and comprising Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria, took up an application by the Enforcement Directorate for recall of the court's April 26, 2023 judgment in Ritu Chhabaria vs. Union of India & Ors case. A two-judge bench of Justices (retired) Krishna Murari and C T Ravikumar it its 2023 judgment deprecated the 'practice' of investigating agencies filing chargesheet in court even before completion of probe so as to deny default bail to accused, and said that even in such cases the right of the accused to default bail will not be extinguished. As per the law, the chargesheet has to be filed within 60 days from the date of arrest of the accused in cases triable by lower courts and 90 days in cases triable by a sessions court. Failure to file the chargesheet within this period entitles an accused to default bail. Days after the April 26 ruling, the ED approached the SC and told a bench presided by then CJI D Y Chandrachud that the Delhi High Court had granted bail to the accused in a case probed by it based on the SC judgment in the Ritu Chhabaria case. The agency pointed out that the decision will have nationwide repercussions. By order dated May 12, 2023, the SC suspended the operation of the April 26 judgment. On Tuesday, CJI Gavai expressed his displeasure over the one-judge bench, even if that be the CJI-headed bench, hearing appeals against judgements of any other bench of the SC. 'When a bench of two learned judges of this court grants any relief, can another bench, merely because it sits in court number 1, of the same strength, sit in appeal over that judgment,' asked CJI Gavai. He said, 'We believe in adherence to the judicial propriety, judicial discipline. If we go on permitting this, then one bench merely because it does not like an order, will go on interfering with the orders of the other bench.' 'The Chief Justice of India is not superior to the other judges. He is the first among the others. The CJI exercises the same judicial powers as all other judges of this court,' the CJI said. Appearing for ED, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the three-judge bench that the petitioner in the matter in which the April 26 judgment was delivered had 'misused' the court's jurisdiction. He said initially, a person filed a petition saying her husband was in jail and sought permission to allow her to send him home-cooked food. 'Thereafter the petitioner (in the April 26 matter) filed a similar petition that 'my husband is also in jail, so permit me to serve him home-cooked food'. The petitioner further pointed out that a similar petition (the first petition) is pending before a particular bench… Both matters are listed together. Then first (petition) pales into insignificance. Subsequently, an Interlocutory Application (IA) is filed…in the second petition where the main prayer is home-cooked food. It says the chargesheet is filed with Section 173(8) CrPC, which says that further investigation is going on…' 'The SC (two-judge) bench takes the view that once you file a chargesheet with 173(8), you will get default bail because it is an incomplete chargesheet,' the SG said, adding that this was contrary to multiple larger-bench judgements. 'Thereafter all-across India, people started filing default bail applications once chargesheet was filed (with section 173(8)).' The counsel for the respondents sought to clarify that in the writ petition for allowing home-cooked food, the IA for default bail was filed before the first hearing of the case. On the first hearing, IA was allowed, and notice was issued in the writ petition. The SG said if the court did not want to look at the recall request, it can still consider the ED's SLP filed against the Delhi High Court order and settle the law. The court finally agreed to list it before a three-judge bench.
Hindustan Times
16 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Punjab: Abohar fire officer caught red-handed while accepting bribe
The vigilance bureau (VB) on Tuesday arrested a fire officer on the charge of accepting a bribe of ₹20,000. The accused was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe. (HT File) An official spokesperson of the VB said Varinder Kathuria, posted at Abohar, reportedly demanded the bribe from Rishav Kalia, resident of Abohar in Fazilka district. The complainant sells new fire extinguishers and refills old fire extinguishers. 'The accused reportedly demanded a bribe of ₹25,0000- ₹30,000 in the form of commission for the bills to be cleared by him. Besides this, the complainant met the accused at his house regarding clearance of his other bills also,' the spokesperson said. 'The complainant did not want to pay a bribe to him for his rightful work. He recorded his conversation with the accused and reported the matter to the VB unit in Fazilka,' the spokesperson added. Following the complaint, the accused was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe, amounting to ₹20,000, in presence of a government witness. A case has been registered against the accused. The accused fire officer will be produced in a court on Wednesday. The statement of the complainant was recorded at the Vigilance Bureau, Unit Fazilka. Subsequently the accused was caught red handed while accepting the bribe of ₹20,000/- in presence of Govt. witness and the said case was registered against the aforesaid accused u/s 7 P.C Act 1988, as Amended by PC (Amendment) Act, 2018 Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Range Ferozpur. The instant case is under investigation. The accused Fire officer will be produced before the competent court tomorrow.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Two girls raped by staff of private pool in Narela
Two men – both workers at a privately owned swimming pool in Lampur near north Delhi's Narela – were arrested for allegedly gang-raping two nine-year-old girls and holding them captive overnight at the pool complex, police said on Tuesday. Two girls raped by staff of private pool in Narela The accused, identified as 37-year-old Anil Kumar and 24-year-old Munil Kumar, worked at MK Swimming Pool near Lampur bus stand located near the city's northern border with Haryana. Police have booked both of them for gangrape, wrongful confinement, criminal intimidation, and aggravated sexual assault, investigators privy to the case details said. The horrific crime occurred on August 5 when the two minor girls, both of whom lived with their families at a slum in Bawana, went to the swimming pool near Lampur bus stand without informing their families. While Anil is a contractor employed by the owner of the pool, Munil is the pool's caretaker. The pool, police said, is owned by a person named Pawan, who has no role in the crime. Police officials said the pool complex was not fully operational, but routinely allowed a few people to use the pool. The girls had gone there in the past as well. According to the complaint filed by one of the victims' mothers, her daughter had been playing at her aunt's house in Bawana when she and two other girls, including a 12-year-old, boarded a bus to the pool. While the 12-year-old girl returned home, the two nine-year-olds went missing overnight. The mother recounted that her daughter returned home around 5am the next day but initially did not disclose the assault. 'We frantically searched for my daughter in the neighbourhood but could not find her. Before we could approach the police, she returned home… When I asked her where she was the entire night, she told me that an 'uncle' at the swimming pool had locked her and another girl in a room there. However, but she didn't reveal the rape out of fear,' the mother said. The investigator cited above said that the for two days, the traumatised girls remained silent as the accused had allegedly threatened to kill them if they spoke about the assault. It was only on August 7 that one of the girls confided in her aunt, who then informed the parents. The families immediately approached the Narela police station. On the basis of that complaint, police registered the first information report (FIR) on August 9 under sections 70 (gang rape), 127 (wrongful confinement), and 351 (criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and sections 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) and 10 (sexual harassment) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. 'The girl told her mother that this uncle – who was later identified as Anil Kumar – asked her to pay him for using the swimming pool. When she told him that she had no money, he locked her in a room with the other victim. Thereafter, he allegedly raped both the girls. Around the same time, the other man (Munil Kumar), also arrived and allegedly raped the two girls as well,' the officer said, quoting the FIR. 'The two men kept them confined in the room for the entire night and threatened to kill them if they told their families about the rape. They finally released the two girls at around 4.30am on Wednesday.' Deputy commissioner of police (outer-north) Hareshwar V Swami said that the girls' medical examinations were conducted, and their statements were recorded before a judicial magistrate. The police team arrested the two accused on August 10 and recovered critical evidence, DCP Swami said. 'We arrested the two accused after following due procedure. Their interrogation led to the recovery of critical evidence such as a pillow cover, bedsheet and two empty condom packets. We also seized the digital video recorder (DVR) of the swimming pool for evidence gathering purposes,' the DCP said, and added that the arrested men had no previous criminal record.
