Recently, the Kerala High Court dealt with a case filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to quash the Final Report against the petitioners. The case arose from allegations under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) regarding defamatory remarks made by the accused against the complainant, asserting that such statements aimed to insult her modesty.
The High Court observed that the allegations stemmed from personal rivalries rather than genuine intent to harm, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under the relevant section.
Brief Facts:
The prosecution alleges that the petitioner committed an offence punishable under Section 509 of IPC by making defamatory remarks about the complainant, including claims that she is a prostitute. The allegations were investigated, leading to a final report filed by the authorities, which the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court took cognizance of. The petitioners sought to quash these proceedings, arguing that even if the remarks were defamatory, they did not fulfil the criteria necessary to constitute an offence under Section 509 of IPC.
Contention of Petitioner:
The Counsel for the petitioner argued that the statements made, while derogatory, did not amount to a violation of Section 509 IPC, which requires specific intent and action directed at the victim to insult her modesty. The counsel referenced the decision in ‘Sibi v. State of Kerala’, where the Court ruled that mere defamatory statements made to third parties could not be treated as an offence under Section 509 if they were not directed at the victim with the intention to insult her modesty. The Counsel further contended that the statements in question were responses to prior insults from the complainant and lacked sexual intent.
Observation of the Court:
The Court examined the allegations in light of the essential elements required to establish an offence under Section 509 of IPC. It concluded that the statements made by the accused did not demonstrate an intention to insult the complainant directly. The Court noted, “On persuing the sentence uttered, the same in no way suggest any sexual intent or words to outrage the modesty or to intrude upon the privacy of the victim”. Furthermore, it observed that the necessary criteria of directing derogatory remarks towards the complainant were not met, stating, “Even though there is allegation that some gestures shown by the accused using his tongue, what is the gesture, not disclosed to analyse whether the said gesture poses any sexual intent or something to outrage the modesty of the victim or intrude upon her privacy”.
The Court highlighted that the allegations stemmed from a personal rivalry within a residence association rather than any genuine intent to harm the complainant. It concluded that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under the relevant section, asserting, “Thus, the prosecution allegation in this case not made out prima facie and in such view of the matter, the quashment, as sought for, is liable to be allowed”. Ultimately, the Court allowed the petition to quash the Final Report and all further proceedings against the petitioners, reinforcing that the allegations did not substantiate the necessary elements of the alleged offence.
Case Title: ANSON I.J. vs. STATE OF KERALA
Citation: CRL.MC NO. 4854 OF 2021
Coram: Justice A. Badharudeen
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. John Sebastian Ralph V., Vishnu Chandran, Ralph Reti John, Giridhar Krishna Kumar, Appu Babu, Vishnumaya M.B., Geethu T.A., Apoorva Ramkumar
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. P.V. Saritha, Basil Mathew
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com