Latest news with #JusticeRNManjula
NDTV
4 days ago
- NDTV
Pulling Woman's Hand Not Offence If Criminal Intent Not Proven: High Court
Chennai: 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.
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- New Indian Express
Pulling woman's hand not offence if criminal intent not proved, says Madras HC
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has observed that a man pulling a woman's hand, though would shock her sense of decency, should be coupled with criminal intention to constitute an offence. Justice RN Manjula made the observations recently while setting aside the conviction and punishment imposed on a caste Hindu man, R Murugesan, for outraging the modesty of an SC woman of unsound mind by pulling her hands when she was grazing cattle in Madurai district in 2015. Murugesan was booked by Sholavandan police under sections 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act and 354 of IPC. The trial judge acquitted him from the charges under SC/ST Act and convicted him for the offence under 354 IPC ( assaulting a woman with intent to outrage her modesty), and sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment in 2018. Hearing an appeal filed by Murugesan against his conviction and sentence, Justice Manjula observed that prosecution failed to prove that Murugesan had pulled the victim's hands with a criminal intention. If the accused had any other intention like pulling the victim away from the centre of a road or to avert any other accident, it cannot be considered as commission of an offence of outraging the modesty based on vague and generalised statements without clear and detailed evidence about the intention, she added. The judge also observed that the statements of the eyewitnesses were vague and contradictory and not sufficient to convict the accused. Therefore, Murugesan is entitled to benefit of doubt, she held and allowed his appeal.
Time of India
05-08-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
HC directive to state on discrimination in fetching water
Madurai: Adequate number of drinking water taps have been installed in Thalaivankottai village in Tenkasi district, where people of the scheduled caste community were discriminated against in getting their share of water, district collector informed the Madras high court . The court then directed the govt to follow a similar method in all villages across the state to ensure there is no discrimination among people in fetching water. During the previous hearing, the court took note of an elderly woman's submission stating that it was difficult to get a little share of water from the common water tap situated in the street where other community people reside. Pursuant to an earlier direction, the Tenkasi collector filed a report stating that 17 public water tap connections were installed and water supply is given for three hours a day. A committee comprising the panchayat president, panchayat secretary, and zonal assistant block development officer was formed to ensure there is no discrimination between people belonging to different communities. People from the scheduled caste community are not disturbed by people belonging to other communities, and water is being taken by everyone peacefully without any trouble. So there was no complaint about discrimination. Justice R N Manjula appreciated the efforts taken by the Tenkasi collector. "There can be several reasons why the problem of discrimination is not brought by individuals directly to the notice of the authorities even when it might exist. If there is a demand for any public resource or inconvenience due to inadequate numbers or unequal distribution, disputes are bound to occur. In many places, the public water tap connection points happen to be the breeding grounds for various offences. Section 3(1)(za) (A) of the Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes (POA) Act includes obstruction and prevention of a member of a scheduled caste or a scheduled tribe from the use of a common public area or resources as an offence. The govt has a bounden duty to ensure effective implementation of the Act," the judge observed. The judge observed that the demand for more public tap connections in the village has been fulfilled now by the action initiated by the Tenkasi collector. This could be the case with every village across the state. Hence, the district administration of all districts, as part of their essential duties, needs to constitute committees in each village panchayat to supervise whether the public resources dedicated to the use of the common public are accessible to everyone without any discrimination on the basis of caste and ensure a healthy atmosphere, in order to achieve the objectives of the Act. Hence, the judge directed the director of municipal administration, director of town panchayats, and district collectors under the supervision of the chief secretary with the effective coordination of the director general of police to follow the method followed in Thalaivankottai village for implementing the objectives of the Act, and file a report in this regard.
