Kochi: The Kerala High Court has ruled that an offence of outraging a woman's modesty under Section 354 of the IPC occurs when the offender’s actions are such that they could be perceived as capable of shocking a woman's sense of decency.

In this case, the President of the Parent Teachers Association (PTA) at an upper primary school was accused of using obscene language and outraging the modesty of the school headmistress. It was alleged that during a PTA meeting, he grabbed both of her hands and pulled her towards his body.

Justice Muralee Krishna S, while quashing the conviction under Section 354 of the IPC, stated that the revision petitioner may have acted in the heat of the moment during the PTA meeting when it was decided that he would be expelled from the PTA. “The ultimate test for determining whether modesty has been outraged is whether the offender’s actions could be perceived as capable of shocking a woman’s sense of decency,” the court observed.

The revision petitioner had appealed to the High Court, challenging his conviction under Sections 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) and 354 (assault or criminal force to outrage a woman’s modesty) of the IPC.

The allegation was that the revision petitioner, while attempting to snatch a written note from the school headmistress during the PTA meeting, outraged her modesty and caused her injury. It was also claimed that the headmistress was slapped and suffered an injury below her nose.

The trial court had sentenced him to one month of simple imprisonment with a fine for slapping and causing hurt. It also imposed a three-month simple imprisonment sentence with a fine for outraging the complainant's modesty. His appeal was subsequently dismissed by the Additional Sessions Court.

The petitioner argued that he had filed complaints against the school management and that the actions taken against him were in retaliation. The court found no evidence to suggest that the headmistress had any personal enmity towards the petitioner. Considering the injury sustained by the headmistress, the Court upheld the conviction under Section 323 of the IPC.

However, for an offence under Section 354 of the IPC to be made out, the Court explained, there must be assault and the use of criminal force with the intention to outrage a woman’s modesty.

The Court noted that no other witnesses testified that the petitioner had grabbed the complainant's hands and pulled her towards his body. It concluded that the elements required to establish an offence under Section 354 were not present, Live Law reported.

Consequently, the Court set aside the conviction under Section 354 of the IPC. Taking a lenient view, the Court reduced the one-month imprisonment to imprisonment until the rising of the Court and directed the petitioner to pay a compensation of Rs 10,000 to the complainant.