Mumbai: “Written” insulting words, either on email or social media, that could lower the dignity of a woman, is sufficient to book someone under section 509 (insulting the modesty of woman) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Bombay High Court has said.
The high court refused to quash a 2009 case against a man, a resident of a plush society in Colaba, who allegedly sent an email to his society member, with whose mother he had a dispute. The email was marked to other society members as well. The complainant is now over 70 years old.
The man sought quashing of the FIR contending that as per section 509, the word ‘uttered’ would only mean ‘spoken words’ and not words ‘written’ on an email or social media posts etc.
The court, however, dismissed his arguments observing that the courts must adopt a purposive approach of interpretation. “Advent of modern technology has opened- up wide spectrum of means to communicate an insult. When an e-mail containing objectionable content likely to outrage the modesty of a woman stares at her, can we permit the perpetrator to walk away undaunted, simply because the insult is written and not spoken,” a bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and Neela Gokhale observed. It added that “Interpretation must correspond to societal transformations and re-evaluate legal principles to ensure fairness, justice, and equity”.
As the society evolves, the interpretation of the law too must be evolved to address emerging challenges and promote social progress, the bench said. It added that the law is a dynamic entity capable of reflecting and adapting to a society’s changing needs and values.
The bench said that the interpretation must be understood to support the legislative intent, which is to deter action of the offender as could be perceived as one which can shock the sense of decency of a woman. The word ‘utterance’ must not be given a pedantic interpretation. “If such a narrow interpretation is accepted, many men will walk away, unhindered by consequences merely by shooting e- mails or using social media platforms to malign and insult a woman and outrage her modesty. Modern technology makes such manner of perpetrating the offence verily real,” the bench underlined.
“Similarly, to ‘exhibit’ an object is not restricted to actually and physically exhibiting it by the accused himself, but the exhibition can be by way of an agency of a device such as a personal computer, mobile phone or any other electronic device,” the judges added.
There were disputes between the two over the complainant woman allegedly interfering in the business of the society as her mother was elected as the chairperson of the society. The FIR, lodged in December 2008, stated that the man sent several emails to the complainant making objectionable comments on her character.
The bench underscored that the contents of the emails are “undeniably defamatory and aimed to lower the image and reputation” of the complainant in the eyes of society and particularly to the persons, to whom its copies are forwarded.
Badlapur Sexual Abuse: Bombay High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance
The court hence upheld invoking of charges of section 509 IPC and section 67 of the Information & Technology Act. The court, however, deleted the charges invoked under section 354 (assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage modesty) against the man.
