The Telangana High Court in the case K.Rattaiah @ Ratnaji v. The State of Andhra Pradesh observed that if a woman herself doesn’t perceive the act of ‘catching hold of her hand’ as invading her decency. It was observed then such an act on part of an accused would not attract the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC.
Section 354 Indian Penal Code, 1860 penalizes acts of assault or criminal force to woman with “intent” to outrage her modesty.
The bench comprising of Justice K. Surender observed that while considering the present facts and circumstances of the case, since P.W.1 herself did not perceive the act of catching hold of her hand as invading her decency as a woman and it cannot be said that to sustain the conviction, the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC are made out.
Under Section 354 of the IPC, the applicant herein was convicted and is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five years and also to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months passed by Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
In the present case, the applicant is working as a maid in the house of then Registrar General of the High Court. It was alleged that the appellant was caught holding of her hand and her bangles were broken. Thereafter, immediately, she cried for help and the appellant fled from the flat.
It was noted by the High Court that when questioned during the chief examination, it was stated by the complainant that when the accused caught hold of her hand and she does not know the object or intention with which the accused caught hold of her hand, she got angry.
The bench relied upon the Apex Court judgement delivered in the case Rupan Deol Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill, wherein the court observed that it cannot be said that catching hold of the hand of the complainant amounts to outraging her modesty in the present facts and when she did not know about any intention or the object of the accused in catching hold of her hand.
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the bench set aside the conviction.
