Using Sexist language against Women may amount to offence under IPC: Delhi Court

    Physical hearings at Delhi High Court, subordinate courts likely to resume  from September 1

    Normal
    0

    false
    false
    false

    EN-IN
    X-NONE
    X-NONE

    Using sexist language against women can attract charges of sexual harassment
    under the Indian Penal Code, a Delhi Court order said while turning down the
    plea of a man who faced the charges of Sexual Harassment and insulted a women’s
    modesty.

    In February, the Magistrate’s Court had found merit in a Police case in
    which a woman had filed a complaint against her manager saying that he verbally
    abused her in January 2016. The man challenged that order in a session court,
    which, but the court refused to meddle because the woman’s allegations against
    the man were specific.

    The woman made the complaint when the manager sat at her desk the previous
    month and directed sexist slang towards her. When she complained about the
    incident to her reporting manager, he asked her to ignore the incident if she
    wanted to keep working at the company.`

    The court noted that just because she didn’t mention the exact date and time
    of the incident did not mean her complaint should be discarded.

    The Court referred to a judgment of the Supreme Court in Sheoraj Singh
    Ahlawat & Ors vs State of U.P. and noted that ground for presuming the
    accused had committed the offense had to be considered.

    Judge Rana stated that the court is not required to weigh in the evidence at
    the stage of charge. And if there are any changes in the statement of the complainant
    and it is required at the trial then they will be considered by the court later
    on.

    The Judge also stated that if the woman is not recording her statement
    doesn’t mean that the man can be discharged. The court added that reasons are
    only recorded by the trial court only if the court decided that the discharge
    is deserved to the accused.

    “Reasons are not required to be given when the court thinks that the
    case is prima facie,” 
    the order noted.