Delhi Court Acquits Priya Ramani, Emphasizes Understanding of Sexual Abuse and Harassment

Judgement Given On : 17/02/2021

In the case of Mobashar Jawed Akbar v. Priya Ramani, the Rouse Avenue District Court in New Delhi, under the jurisdiction of Judge Ravindra Kumar Pandey, delivered an acquittal verdict on February 17, 2021. The court underscored the importance of societal awareness and understanding of sexual abuse and harassment, emphasizing their profound impact on victims.


The case revolved around a complaint filed by Mobashar Jawed Akbar against Priya Ramani, accusing her of defaming him and damaging his reputation through tweets, articles, and other publications in both print and online media platforms. Akbar alleged that Ramani intentionally published false and damaging statements with the aim of harming his reputation. He contended that her allegations were fabricated and malicious, as she had previously acknowledged that he did not engage in any wrongdoing towards her. Akbar further argued that Ramani’s failure to take any action against him before any relevant authority regarding the alleged incident indicated that her defamatory articles were baseless and driven solely by a desire to tarnish his image.


Ramani defended herself by claiming that her publications were made in the public interest to shed light on her own experience of sexual harassment. She alleged that Akbar had sexually harassed her during a job interview held in his hotel room. Ramani argued that her publications were made in good faith to protect the interests of other women and that they fell within exceptions 1, 3, and 9 of Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Rouse Avenue District Court made several significant observations:

  1. The court recognized that sexual harassment and abuse often occur in private settings, making it challenging for victims to comprehend or articulate their experiences. Victims may not immediately realize that they have been subjected to abuse or harassment, contributing to their reluctance to speak out.
  2. The court acknowledged the systemic workplace abuse related to sexual harassment that existed before the issuance of the Vishaka Guidelines by the Supreme Court of India and the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013. The court noted that social stigma and a lack of mechanisms to address sexual harassment often deterred victims from reporting such incidents.
  3. The court stressed the importance of society’s understanding of sexual abuse and harassment and their consequences on victims. It called for recognizing that an abusive person, like anyone else, has a family and friends.
  4. The court emphasized that victims of sexual abuse may remain silent for years, as they often do not recognize themselves as victims. Fear and the associated social stigma contribute to their silence.
  5. The court viewed the attack on the character of a sex offender by a sex abuse victim as an act of self-defense, borne out of the mental trauma and shame associated with the crime.
  6. The court asserted that the right to raise one’s voice against sexual abuse should not be punished under defamation claims. It stated that the right to reputation cannot override a woman’s right to life and dignity, as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, nor can it supersede the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, as provided by Article 14 of the Constitution.

In light of these considerations, the court found that the complainant had failed to establish the offense punishable under Section 500 of the IPC against the accused, Priya Ramani. Consequently, Ramani was acquitted of the charges.