Outraging modesty IPC – Outraging modesty definition in IPC
What constitutes an outrage to female modesty is nowhere defined in IPC.
In the case of Abhyanand Mishra vs. State of Bihar (1961) 2 Cr. LJ 822, AIR 1961 SC 1698]
Court held :
1. The act of pulling a woman, removing her saree, coupled with a request for sexual intercourse, is such as would be an outrage to the modesty of a woman.
2. Ascertaining whether modesty has been outraged is whether the action of the offender is such as could be perceived as one which is capable of shocking the sense of decency of a woman.
3. The essence of a woman’s modesty is her sex. The culpable intention of the accused is the crux of the matter.
4. The reaction of the woman is very relevant, but its absence is not always decisive.
5. Knowledge, that modesty is likely to be outraged, is sufficient to constitute the offence without any deliberate intention having such outrage alone for its object.
6. Essence of a woman’s modesty is her sex and from her very birth, she possesses modesty which is the attribute of her sex.
State of Punjab v. Major Singh
In State of Punjab v. Major Singh (AIR 1967 SC 63) a question arose whether a female child of seven and a half months could be said to be possessed of ‘modesty’ which could be outraged.
In answering the above question the majority view was that when any act done to or in the presence of a woman is clearly suggestive of sex according to the common notions of mankind that must fall within the mischief of Section 354 IPC.