Touching a woman is an insult to her honour: Bombay High Court

Mumbai. If a person touches a woman’s body without her permission, then he harms the dignity and prestige of that woman. In this way, he commits the crime of outraging the modesty or modesty of the woman. The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court said this while dismissing the petition of a 36-year-old man accused in the case of putting his hand on the honor of a woman. Judge Mukund. Yes. Sevilkar’s single bench delivered its verdict on the petition filed by Parameshwar Dhage against the August 21 judgment of the Jalna Sessions Court and dismissed the petition. The Sessions Court fully upheld the Magistrate Court’s decision and found the accused guilty under sections 451 and 351-A of the IPC.

According to the information given by the woman to the police, on July 4, 2014, when she was alone at home with her grandmother-in-law. On the same day in the night the accused came to her house and inquired about her husband. On this the woman told that today her husband will not come to the house. After this the person left from there but at around 11 pm he entered the woman’s house. The woman was sleeping at that time. During this he felt that someone is touching his feet. She immediately got up and saw that the person was sitting on her cot. The woman told that the accused fled from there after she shouted. The woman immediately informed her husband about this and asked to come home. After this she reached the police station and lodged a complaint against the accused.

Appearing on behalf of the accused, the lawyer told the court that the woman had not locked the door of the house from inside. It states that his client had entered his house only with the consent of the woman. The lawyer said that my client did not touch the woman’s feet with any obscene intention. The lawyer said that when the husband is not at home, the women keep the door of the house completely closed. If the woman got all this wrong, then why was the complaint lodged after 12 hours.

After hearing both the sides, the court said, it is clear that the petitioner has done the work of putting a hand on the honor of a woman. The petitioner entered her house without the woman’s permission and was also touching her leg while sitting on the woman’s cot. This behavior of the petitioner reveals obscene intentions. The court said that during the hearing of the case, the petitioner could not give any satisfactory answer as to why he was at the victim’s house at midnight. Knowing that the woman’s husband was not at home, the petitioner deliberately entered her house and tried to touch the woman. Considering the decision of the lower court to be correct, the court dismisses the petition of the accused person.