Sending Messages 'You Look Smart, I Like You' 'To Unknown Woman Amounts To Insulting Her Modesty: Mumbai Court
20 Feb 2025 9:12 PM
Sending messages like "You are slim. You look very smart. You are fair, I like you, Are you married or not?" etc to an unknown woman on WhatsApp, that too late in the night, would amount to insulting her modesty, a sessions court in Mumbai held recently while upholding the conviction of a man, who sent such objectionable messages to a former corporator.
Additional Sessions Judge DG Dhoble noted from the record that on January 26, 2016, the victim, who was then a sitting corporator from Mumabi's Borivali area, received messages - “Are you asleep? Are you married or not? You are looking smart. You are very fair. I like you. My age is 40 years. Meet you tomorrow" on her WhatsApp. The judge further noted that soon after she informed her husband and tried to call the 'unknown' number, the person who owned the said number - Narsingh Gude, did not receive the call and instead sent - “Sorry, call not accepted at night. WhatsApp chatting I like, come online” messages along with some 'obscene' photographs and messages too.
In the order passed on February 18, the judge observed that the messages and photographs were indeed 'obscene' and also noted that there was no relationship between the accused Gude and the victim or her husband, who too was a former corporator.
"No married woman or her husband, who are reputed and Corporator would bear such WhatsApp messages and obscene photos sent on her mobile in evening time from 11.00 pm to 12.30 am, especially, when there is no any relationship with sender. The alleged messages words, acts would amount to insult the modesty of women (under section 509 of the IPC)," the judge held in his order.
The court also held that the act of sending the obscene phots and the objectionable messages were sufficient for attracting punishment under sections 67 (transmission of obscene material in electronic form) and 67A (transmission of sexually explicit material in electronic form) of the Information and Technology (IT) Act.
According to the complainant, she approached the police because she felt 'ashamed' and 'outraged' after receiving those messages. However, the defence contended that no such incident took place and that the complainant and her husband had a 'political rivalry' with the accused and thus by using her 'political influence' the complainant, got a false case registered.
However, the court junked their argument. It said, "No woman would stake her dignity by implicating an accused in a false case. Therefore, the oral and documentary evidence of the complainant and her husband proves that she was received messages and obscene photographs from the accused on the relevant day."
As regards, the argument of the accused that he was not the one who sent, the judge said, "Since the appellant had exclusive knowledge of his phone's usage, he had the burden to explain how the messages originated from his number. His failure to provide any plausible explanation allows the Court to draw an adverse inference. The sender's identity is not automatically presumed but is established through circumstantial evidence, documentary proof and adverse inference under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act which is duly established by the prosecution."
Therefore, the court upheld the three months simple imprisonment imposed upon Gude and the fine amounts.
With these observations, the court dismissed the appeal filed by Gude against his conviction and sentence by a Metropolitan Magistrate Court in Borivali.
Appearance:
Advocate Ninad Muzumdar appeared for the Appellant.
Additional Public Prosecutor Mahajan represented the State.
Case Title: Narsingh Gude vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal 272 of 2022)
No comments:
Post a Comment