Bombay High Court’s Landmark Verdict on Modesty

Judgement Given On : 04/08/2021

Introduction

On August 4, 2021, the Bombay High Court issued a groundbreaking judgment in the case of Shrikrushna v. State of Maharashtra. This case delved into the intricate nuances of outraging a woman’s modesty, shedding light on the complexities involved in determining when and how modesty is violated. The verdict underscores the importance of a context-sensitive approach when dealing with such cases and the need for a comprehensive understanding of what constitutes an offense against modesty.

The case centered around Shrikrushna, the applicant, who faced charges under Sections 354 (outraging modesty of a woman), 509 (using words, gestures, or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). His conviction resulted in a two-year rigorous imprisonment sentence and fines amounting to Rs. 80,000.

The complainant, Mrs. S, alleged that Shrikrushna had made unwarranted advances towards her. These advances included the act of throwing a chit at her, which contained poetic verses expressing love for her. When Mrs. S refused to accept the chit, Shrikrushna threw it at her, uttering the words, “I love you.” Additionally, he allegedly engaged in obscene gestures and warned her not to disclose the chit’s contents to anyone. The complaint also mentioned previous incidents of flirting and the throwing of small pebbles at her.

Key Observations

The Bombay High Court made several critical observations in its verdict:

  1. Absence of Material for Section 506 (Criminal Intimidation): The Court noted that there was a lack of substantial evidence to support the charge under Section 506 of the IPC. It emphasized that criminal intimidation necessitated a specific intent and a threat of harm, elements that were notably absent in this case. Consequently, the conviction under this section was deemed unsustainable.
  2. Chit Throwing as an Act of Outraging Modesty: The Court underscored that the very act of throwing a chit at Mrs. S, which contained expressions of love and poetic verses, constituted an outrage to her modesty. It further emphasized that a woman’s modesty was her most treasured possession and could not be assessed through a rigid, one-size-fits-all formula.
  3. Non-Interference with Convictions under Sections 354 and 509: The Court upheld the convictions under Sections 354 and 509 of the IPC. It cited the compelling evidence presented during the trial, including Mrs. S’s testimony regarding Shrikrushna’s flirtatious behavior and the chit-throwing incident. These factors were considered sufficient reasons not to interfere with these convictions.
  4. Sentencing Modification: Taking into account that Shrikrushna had already served 45 days in incarceration and considering that the 2013 amendment introduced a minimum sentence under Section 354, the Court modified the sentence for these sections to time served. However, it raised the fines to Rs. 50,000 for Section 354 and Rs. 40,000 for Section 509.
  5. Payment of Fine: The Court directed Shrikrushna to deposit the prescribed fines in the trial court within the next 15 days.

Conclusion

The Bombay High Court’s verdict in the Shrikrushna case is a testament to the intricate nature of cases involving the violation of a woman’s modesty. It underscores the imperative need for a contextual and empathetic assessment of such cases, recognizing that seemingly innocuous actions, such as throwing a chit with expressions of love, can have profound implications concerning modesty. This ruling reflects the evolving legal landscape surrounding offenses against women and emphasizes the importance of ensuring that justice is dispensed with a deep understanding of the nuances inherent in each case.