Bangalore District Court
Shruthi Pathak vs Kiran Raghv on 21 April, 2026
KABC0C0099572019
1 CC.No.52797/2019
IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL. C.J.M.,
MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU
Dated: This the 21st day of April 2026
PRESENT: Smt. ANJALI SHARMA.V.S
B.B.A.(Hons.), LL.B.(Hons.),
X Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
C.C.No.52797/2019
Complainant : State by, Police Sub Inspector
Indira Nagar Police Station
V/s.
Accused : Kiran Raghav S/o. S.Raghav
Aged about 40 years,
R/at. 160/1, Vijaya Nilaya, 5th Cross,
Syndicate Bank Lane,
Konena Agrahara, HAL,
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Indira Nagar police station has filed this charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable u/S. 354A, 354C, 507 of IPC.
KABC0C0099572019 2 CC.No.52797/2019
2. It is the case of the prosecution that:
In 2016, accused and CW1 used to work at Monster.Com India Pvt. Ltd company, on 13th Main Road, Double Road of Indira Nagar. During this time, accused misbehaved and sexually harassed CW1 by forcing her to go with him while going for meetings, sat behind her closely on a two wheeler touching her and forced her to ride the two wheeler and unnecessarily touched her in the office. On 17/06/2016 accused forced CW1 to take leave and go to watch a movie with him. When CW1 refused to do the same, accused threatened to spoil her future life. Accused also sent her indecent and obscene messages to the mobile phone of CW1 and abused her in foul language and threatened her and thereby sexual harassed CW1. Hence, it is alleged that accused committed offences punishable under section 354A, 354C, 507 of IPC.
KABC0C0099572019 3 CC.No.52797/2019
3. On the basis of the FIS lodged by the informant, case was registered against the accused in Indira Nagar P.S., Cr.No.228/206 and FIR was submitted to the court. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the accused for the alleged offences.
4. Cognizance of offence was taken and summons was issued to the accused. Accused appeared before the court through his counsel and he enlarged on bail. Copy of charge- sheet was furnished to the accused u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, charge was framed against the accused for the offences punishable U/s. 354A, 507, 506 of IPC. There were no grounds to frame charge u/s 354C of IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined six witness as PW1 to 6, and got marked 8 documents as Ex.P1 to KABC0C0099572019 4 CC.No.52797/2019 Ex.P8 and identified one M.O.1. Ex.D1 to 3 were marked on confrontation.
6. Thereafter, statement under Section 313 of Cr.PC of the accused was recorded. He denied the incriminating material against him and submitted that he had evidence to lead. He got examined himself as DW1.
7. Heard the arguments of Sr.APP appearing for the state and the counsel for accused and perused the records.
8. The following points arise for determination:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that, in 2016, when accused No.1 & CW1 were working together at Monster.Com India Pvt.Ltd company, accused, being the manager of CW1 sexually harassed CW1 by making physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures and demanded/ requested for sexual favours and thereby committed offence punishable u/s 354A of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that, accused committed criminal intimidation by sending messages to the mobile phone of CW1 KABC0C0099572019 5 CC.No.52797/2019 with threat to fire her from her job and trouble her, with intent to cause alarm to CW1 and thereby committed offence punishable u/s 507 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that, accused committed criminal intimidation by sending anonymous messages to the mobile phone of CW1 with threat to fire her from her job and trouble her, with intent to cause alarm to CW1 and thereby committed offence punishable u/s 507 of IPC?
4. What order?
9. The above points are answered in the following manner;
Point No.1 - Affirmative, Point No.2 - Affirmative, Point No.3 - Negative, Point No.4 - As per final order, for the following;
REASONS
10. POINTS NOS.1 to 3: For the sake of brevity and clarity, and in order to avoid repetition of fact, Points no.1 to 3 are taken up together.
It is the case of prosecution that, when accused No.1 & CW1 were working together at Monster.Com India Pvt.Ltd KABC0C0099572019 6 CC.No.52797/2019 company, where accused was the manager of CW1, he sexually harassed CW1 by making physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures and demanded/ requested for sexual favours and also criminally intimidated her.
11. It is well laid that in a criminal case the entire burden of proof rest upon the prosecution and the accused need prove nothing. Suffice for the accused to create doubt about the case of the prosecution and the reliability of the witnesses for prosecution.
12. The prosecution in order to prove its case, got examined the informant, PW1. In her chief examination, she deposed that, she was working at Monster.com India Pvt. Ltd in the year 2016, where accused was her reporting boss. She alleged that accused harassed her by forcing her to wait after the office hours, forcing her to drop her home even though she did KABC0C0099572019 7 CC.No.52797/2019 not want to be dropped and touched her inappropriately in the office. On 17.06.2016, when accused was on leave, he asked her to skip the office and join him for a movie and when she refused, he threatened her with consequences of damaging her career. Accused used to send her inappropriate messages and images on WhatsApp. Accused also asked her to visit his home, which she refused. Accused continuously messaged her for the next 3 to 4 days. Hence she decided to file a complaint. She has also furnished copies of messages sent by accused.
13. In the cross-examination of PW1, she deposed that, she had gone to police station to lodge complaint with her husband and family friends, by name Bhaskar, Antony and Arun. They wrote the complaint in English and gave the same in the police station. She does not remember the exact date when the accused asked her to stay late in the office. There was no impediment for her to lodge complaint earlier in June. She does not remember if she gave a copy of the complaint lodged before KABC0C0099572019 8 CC.No.52797/2019 Human Resource Development to the police. The same is not mentioned in her chief examination. She does not remember whether CCTV camera were installed in Monster.Com company. She also does not remember, when did the accused drop her to the house. She deposed that, she informed HR Department Staff Jyothi Balasubramani regarding misbehaving by the accused with her. She does not remember, whether she informed regarding the same to any of the office staff of Monster.Com. She admitted that, accused was working as Branch Manager and she was working under him. She admitted that, H.R-Jyothi Balasubramani sent her E-mail regarding her background verification issue as per Ex.D1. She also admitted that, she gave reply as per Ex.D2. She also admitted that, on 02/06/2016 Jyothi Balasubramani sent an E-mail as per Ex.D3. She denied that, she got the job by producing fake documents, and hence she approached the accused for help. She admitted that, accused would call meeting of all the staffs after office hours. He KABC0C0099572019 9 CC.No.52797/2019 would specifically ask her to wait after the meeting also. She deposed that, she does not remember whether she had produced her mobile phone before the Investigating officer or not. She got prepared the 65B certificate in the court campus. She admitted that, she has not mentioned the date and time when she got the certificate prepared. She printed the messages and image through the printer in her house on the date of filing the complaint. She does not remember whether she had produced any document to show that mobile number 8095113355 belongs to her. She denied all other suggestions put fourth to her.
14. PW2, mahazar witness, in his chief examination deposed that, on 23/06/2016 the spot mahazar was conducted in the office of accused in his presence with respect to harassment to PW1 by accused by sending messages. Another mahazar was conducted in the police station. HTC mobile was seized from the possession of accused, as he was sending messages from the said mobile.
KABC0C0099572019 10 CC.No.52797/2019
15. In the cross-examination of PW2, he deposed that, PW1 is his family friend. He deposed that, he does not know who is the owner of company named Monser.Com. The police did not issue any notice to appear as witness. He does not know the full phone number of accused and to which number the messages were sent. The police constable wrote the mahazar and there were three police men at the time of conducting mahazar. The spot mahazar was conducted on 23/06/2016 at 5.00 pm. He also deposed that, on the same day between 8.45 pm & 9.30 pm, he went to the police station, where PW1, CW4 and accused were also present. He along with CW4 signed the seizure mahazar. The M.O.1 belongs to the accused. The police took the M.O.1 from the accused. He denied all other suggestions put forth to him.
16. PW3, colleague of PW1 and accused in his chief examination deposed that, PW1 was his colleague at Monster.Com. In the said company he was working as Sales KABC0C0099572019 11 CC.No.52797/2019 Executive and accused was the Manager. He does not know anything about this case and has no information about the accused harassing PW1. He denied that, accused misbehaved with PW1. Though he was treated as hostile by the prosecution, he denied that, accused sexually harassed and misbehaved with PW1 and also sent vulgar messages to her. He also denied that, accused threatened PW1.
17. PW4, another colleague of PW1 deposed that up to 2016, for one year 8 months he was working in Monster.com company as Senior Sales Executive. Accused was his Manager and they were reporting to him. In 2016, PW1 informed them that she was getting inappropriate messages from accused on her WhatsApp which was a harassment for her, where he would ask her to join for meetings and to go to movies. Accused would text her at night which would disturb her. He was the first one to know about this and he was there to support her. They discussed about this and she brought it to the knowledge of the KABC0C0099572019 12 CC.No.52797/2019 HR. HR came down to Bangalore and recorded his statement. Later he got to know that, she gave a complaint to the police.
18. PW4 was treated as partly hostile by the prosecution, where he denied that, on 02/06/2016 he heard PW1 shout at the accused for having sat behind her on her two wheeler, very closely touching her.
19. In his cross-examination by the counsel for the accused, PW4 admitted that, he had come to the court with PW1 and PW1 is his colleague and close friend. He also deposed that, he narrated his version of the incident to the company lawyer and not to the police. He denied all other suggestions put forth to him.
20. PW6, Investigating officer in his chief examination deposed that, when he was PSI of Indira Nagar PS, on 23/06/2016 he received the case file from CW10 and continued investigation. On the same day, he visited the spot shown by KABC0C0099572019 13 CC.No.52797/2019 PW1 and conducted spot mahazar in the presence of PW2 and CW3 from 5.00 pm to 6.00 pm. He deputed CW9 and PC 11506 to find accused. On the same day, they found accused in his residence at Konena Agrahara and produced him before him. He inquired accused and conducted his arrest procedure. CW9 gave report in this regard. On the same day, from 8.45 pm to 9.30 pm he conducted seizure mahazar in the presence of PW2 & CW5 & seized accused's HTC Desire 826 mobile phone and Vodafone SIM card No. 9742544660. He produced accused before the court. On 27/07/2016 he sent seized mobile phone and SIM card for FSL examination. On 30/07/2016 he gave notice to PW1 to attend before the Court and give 164 statement. On 30/08/2016, PW1 gave her statement before him stating that, she is unable to give statement before the court and undertook to inform this to the court during the hearing.
21. In his cross-examination PW6 deposed that, PW1 had gone to the police prior to the mahazar, and he gave oral notice KABC0C0099572019 14 CC.No.52797/2019 to the mahazar witnesses. He deposed that, at the time of mahazar, there was no CCTV at the time of incident. He did not inquire the security guard or the neighbors at the spot. He admitted that, CW2 to 8 may be friends and colleagues of PW1. He deposed that, he seized the mobile phone of the accused. He did not verify if PW1 received the messages. He does not know anything about PW1 producing fake documents to get the job.
22. PW5, Investigating officer, in his chief examination deposed that, when he was PSI of Indira Nagar PS, on 14/04/2017 he received case file from CW11 and continued further investigation. On 22/11/2018 he received FSL report related to this case. After completion of investigation on 24/11/2018 he filed charge sheet.
23. In his cross-examination he deposed that, PW3 and PW4 are the colleagues of PW1. He does not know if they are her friends. He does not know the car in which PW1 was asked to sit KABC0C0099572019 15 CC.No.52797/2019 by the accused. He also does not know the two wheeler on which accused forcibly sat. There may have been CCTV camera inside and out side the company premises. The earlier Investigating officer had not obtained the CCTV footage in this case. He did not obtain any documents to show that the messages received from the mobile number belongs to the accused.
24. Accused in order to rebut the prosecution got examined as DW1 and deposed that, in the year 2016 he along with PW1 were working at Monster.Com in Sales department. He was working as Branch Head and PW1 was an Executive and reporting to him. If his subordinates do not meet the target, he also would not meet the target. Even after 3-4 months of joining work, PW1 had not done one sales also and no report was generated. In this regard, he had warned her multiple times. On 27/05/2016, PW1 received an email from H.R. which was copied to him. In the said mail, it was alleged that, PW1 had given fake documents to get a job and in this regard, she was asked to give KABC0C0099572019 16 CC.No.52797/2019 her reply. She gave a reply that her husband did not have job and as such, she gave fake documents to get the job. PW1 came up to him requesting to save her job. When DW1 refused and asked her to approach HR, PW1 was disappointed. One week later, PW1 got a call from his boss asking why she had not done one sale also. She was also asked to complete all the reports before going home. As DW1 did not support her, in order to teach him a lesson, she filed this false complaint. PW1 admitted to having committed fraud to get the job.
25. In the cross-examination of the DW1, he deposed that, for one year, he was working as the Branch Head at Monster.Com. Prior to joining work, the HR verifies all the documents and if the documents are incorrect the concerned person receives Email from HR. He denied that, PW1 used to reach all the targets and as such she received salary and incentives. He denied that, he sent WhatsApp messages as per Ex.P4. He denied that, he was removed from the job whereas KABC0C0099572019 17 CC.No.52797/2019 PW1 continued to work in the company for two years. He denied that, PW1 gave a confidential complaint, based on which, he was removed from the job.
Analysis and Evaluation of evidence
26. A person arraigned as an accused is presumed to be innocent unless that presumption is rebutted by the prosecution by production of evidence as may show him to be guilty of the offence with which he is charged. The burden of proving the guilt of the accused is upon the prosecution and unless it relieves itself of that burden, the courts cannot record a finding of the guilt of the accused.
27. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, it is the allegation of the prosecution that, accused made physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures towards PW1 and also demanded for sexual favours and sent vulgar/indecent messages on her phone and committed KABC0C0099572019 18 CC.No.52797/2019 criminal intimidation and as such accused committed an offence punishable U/s. 354(A), 507, 506 of IPC.
28. In order to attract the section 354A of IPC accused must have committed the act of physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures; or a demand or request for sexual favours; or showing pornography against the will of a woman; or making sexually coloured remarks.
29. On perusal of Ex.P1 complaint, PW1 alleged that, accused used to ask her to stay late after the office and to go to meeting in his car and touched her inappropriately and on 02/06/2016 he forced her to ride with her on the two wheeler while he sat at the back. She also alleged that, on 17/06/2016 he asked her to skip office and go to watch movie with him, and when she refused, he threatened to ruin her career and life. Since then he is sending threatening messages on her phone.
30. Based on the complaint, mahazar was conducted as KABC0C0099572019 19 CC.No.52797/2019 per Ex.P2, where PW1 stated that, she received messages on her mobile phone bearing No. 8095113355 from accused's mobile phone No. 9742544660. Based on the said submission, on 23/06/2016 HTC design mobile phone belonging to the accused was seized by the police. PW2, seizure mahazar witness deposed that the police seized MO1 mobile phone in his presence. The Investigating officer deposed that he sent the mobile phone for FSL examination.
31. PW1 in her chief examination got marked the screen shots of the messages as Ex.P4 allegedly received from the accused. She has also produced Sec. 65B certificate which had no date and time. The said screen shots though reflected the name, Monster Kiran, it does not show from which number the messages were received and to which mobile number it was sent to.
32. The learned counsel for the accused submitted that KABC0C0099572019 20 CC.No.52797/2019 there is no document to show that Ex.P4 chats were from the accused. Though Ex.P4 screen shots are accompanied with S.65B certificate, the said screen shots are printed and produced by PW1. According to the Investigating officer and PW2, mobile phone of accused, MO1 was seized in the police station as per Ex.P5.
33. Though there are certain irregularities in S.65B certificate, the Investigating officer sent the mobile phone of the accused, MO1 for FSL. The prosecution has produced, Ex.P7 Report of Dr. Kumuda Rani, Assistant Director of FSL. Madiwala Bengaluru, which notes that the HTC Mobile phone was sent to her for examination, where the mobile phone was marked as D1a, vodafone SIM card was marked as D1b and micro SD card was marked as D1c for examination. The mobile phone and SIM card were subjected to forensic acquisition using Cellebrite and digital data using UFED software. They were looked for Whatsapp chat messages and SMS. The report submits that the KABC0C0099572019 21 CC.No.52797/2019 forensic system generated data extracted from the mobile phone was enclosed in a soft copy in a CD bearing Number 714328 BD 1221 accompanying Ex.P7 report.
34. According to the report, the mobile phone contained two chats related to the mobile number 8095113355 which was enclosed in a soft copy in a CD accompanying the Ex.P7 report. On perusal of the said CD, it contains extracted WhatsApp Chats, where messages were sent from mobile number of accused, 918095113355 to the mobile number of PW1, 919742544660. On perusal of the CD submitted in this case by the Forensic Expert, where the data was extracted from the mobile phone of the accused, the following messages were sent from the accused to PW1's mobile phone:
On 20-06-2016 - "I love u - all said n done. GN n sweet dreams", "When I dint fuck ur case when u lied about ur docs, y r u fucking my case for being truthful???" Fuck u man!!!😡😡😡"
KABC0C0099572019 22 CC.No.52797/2019 On 21-06-2016 - "I DO NOT CARE A FUCK ABOUT MY JOB. ULL SEE MY FURY NOW. I'LL FUCK UR HAPPINESS." "Now that I have nothing to lose, lemme tell u 2 things 1. I won't do anything to harm u personally. 2. I want to fuck u. If neither, still got to start responding. Else, I'll fire u. Decide.", "I love u", "This auto correct s 'll kill me. Few things- I want to fuck u", "U need to start communicating.", "Somewhere, u want me. Don't u", "I'm bored babe", "I've had girls easier than this", "I've resigned. So very simple. Can I fuck u"
On 22.06.2026 - "Hmmm....uve complained. Now watch n see what I'll do", "Slut", "I'll fuck u now bitch", "Ur husband too slut", "I'll ensure u r never happy"
35. The above whatsapp chats extracted by the Scientific expert is sufficient to show that messages such as, "I want to fuck u.", "I love u", "I'm bored babe", "I've had girls easier than this", "I've resigned. So very simple. Can I fuck u" and "Now that I have nothing to lose, lemme tell u 2 things 1. I won't do anything to harm u personally. 2. I want to fuck u. If neither, still got to start responding. Else, I'll fire u. Decide.", amounts to sexual harassment. Accused being a superior asking PW1, an employee under him to engage in sexual activities in exchange of KABC0C0099572019 23 CC.No.52797/2019 her job, amounts to demand for sexual favours covered under S.354A of IPC.
36. Accused even sent an image, which is downloaded from his WhatsApp chat to the CD. On perusal, it is an image of a man at the feet of a woman, in a sexualising way, with the caption, "I am not asking you to fall in love with me, but perverted lust and obsessive adoration would be nice". Hence, on perusal of the above messages and image, all of them carries a sexual undertone, sexually harassing PW1.
37. Accused took the defense that PW1 got the job by submitting fake documents and as he refused to protect her from the email of the HR, she filed this false case. He even produced Ex.D1 to 3 email excerpts to show that documents verification was done by the HR. Even if PW1 had obtained the job by producing fake documents, the WhatsApp chats are sufficient to prove that the accused sexually harassed PW1. In KABC0C0099572019 24 CC.No.52797/2019 fact, accused texted PW1 on 20-06-2016 that, "When I dint fuck ur case when u lied about ur docs, y r u fucking my case for being truthful???" Fuck u man!!!" If PW1 indeed obtain the job on fake documents, it does not give a right to the accused to sexually harass PW1, as seen in WhatsApp messages.
38. Apart from sexually harassing PW1, accused even sent threatening messages such as threat to fire her. On 22.06.2016, accused sent messages such as, "Hmmm....uve complained. Now watch n see what I'll do", "Slut", "I'll fuck u now bitch", "Ur husband too slut", "I'll ensure u r never happy". The above messages clearly amounts to criminal intimidation by the accused u/s 506 of IPC.
39. In order to attract Sec.507 of IPC, the prosecution has to prove that there was an anonymous communication of threat sent by the accused. However, based on WhatsApp messages, PW1 knew from whom she was received the alleged KABC0C0099572019 25 CC.No.52797/2019 messages. She has even saved his contact as Monster Kiran Raghu. Therefore it cannot be said that the messages were anonymous. As such no offence u/s 507 of IPC is made out.
40. Further, the Investigating officer has submitted that there was no CCTV in the office premises at the time of the incident. Counsel for accused argued that PW3, colleague of PW1 turned hostile and that the security guard is not examined in this case. However, the said lacunae is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. PW4 deposed about the sexual harassment faced by PW1 at the hands of the accused. And the digital evidence corroborates the allegations made by PW1.
41. Thus, to sum up, here in this case, as observed earlier, there are no ingredients to attract the offence under section 507 of IPC. So far as the offence u/s 354A and 506 of IPC are concerned, PW1, victim and PW4, hearsay witness hae KABC0C0099572019 26 CC.No.52797/2019 supported the prosecution case. It is further proved with help of WhatsApp chats extracted from the mobile phone of accused.
42. So far as minor contradictions and omissions amongst witnesses, if any, it does not go to the root of the prosecution case. Hence on over all perusal of the prosecution papers this court is of the opinion that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence u/s 354A & 506 of IPC. Hence accused is found guilty for the offence u/s 354A & 506 of IPC. Hence I answer the Point no.1 & 2 in the Affirmative and point no.3 in the Negative.
43. POINT NO.4: For the aforesaid reasons, the following order is passed;
ORDER Acting U/sec. 248(1) of CrPC, Accused is acquitted of the offence punishable U/s 507 of IPC.
KABC0C0099572019 27 CC.No.52797/2019 Acting U/sec. 248(2) of Cr.P.C, Accused is found guilty for the offence punishable U/s 354A & 506 of IPC.
Furnish free copy of the Judgment to the Accused.
To hear on sentence.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, directly on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Court today, 21/04/2026) (ANJALI SHARMA.V.S) X A.C.J.M., BENGALURU.
ORDERS ON SENTENCE
1. I have heard both sides.
2. Learned Sr. Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the accused sexually harassed PW1 and threatened her and that the accused may be awarded maximum punishment as prescribed under law.
3. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for Advocate appearing for the accused prays for taking leniency by considering the fact that he is married and has a child.
4. Factual matrix of the case is that, accused being the manager of PW1 at Monster.Com company in 2016, sexually KABC0C0099572019 28 CC.No.52797/2019 harassed PW1 by sending her sexually coloured messages and requested for sexual favours in turn for her job and even threatened her. The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed offence u/s 354A & 506 of IPC.
5. This Court found that the accused is guilty for the offences punishable under Section 354A(ii) & (iv) of IPC. Offence punishable under Section 354A IPC carries sentence of imprisonment rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both where offence is within clause (i), (ii) & (iii); and imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both where the offence is within clause (iv) of S.354A of IPC.
6. Section 248(2) of CrPC provides that, once the accused is found guilty, the Court has to explore if it can extend the benefit of section 360 of Cr.PC. Section 360 of CrPC is akin to Probation of Offenders Act. However, the offence committed is against a woman. Victims of sexual harassment are scarred for life with trauma and negative effects on their psyche. They feel violated, powerless and have constant fear which may forever interfere with their relationships and social interactions. Hence, offence such as sexual harassment will not be tolerated. As such, there is no question of extending the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act and no leniency can be shown to the accused. Therefore, following:
KABC0C0099572019 29 CC.No.52797/2019 ORDER Acting under Section 248(2) of Cr.P.C, Accused is convicted for the offences punishable under Section 354A, 506 of IPC.
Accused shall pay fine of Rs.2,500/- for the offence punishable under 506 of IPC and in default to pay the fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month.
Accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year with fine of Rs.7,500/- for the offence punishable under Section 354A of IPC and in default to pay the fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months.
The period of detention undergone by the accused shall be given set off.
Supply a free copy of the order to the accused.
(Dictated to stenographer directly on to the computer, the transcript thereof is corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 22 nd day of April 2026) Digitally signed by ANJALI V ANJALI V S S SHARMA Date: 2026.05.04 SHARMA 12:09:21 +0530 (Smt. Anjali Sharma V.S) X ACJM, Bengaluru KABC0C0099572019 30 CC.No.52797/2019 ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution:
P.W-1 : Shruthi Pathak; P.W-2 : Anthony; P.W-3 : Santosh Rao; P.W-4 : Ayan Saxena; P.W-5 : Arun Salunke; P.W-6 : Santosh Kumar;
List of documents marked for prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Complaint; Ex.P1(a) : Signature of PW1; Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar;
Ex.P2(a to : Signature of PW1, PW2 and PW6;
c)
Ex.P3 : Reply Letter;
Ex.P3(a & : Signature of PW1 and PW6;
b)
Ex.P4 : S.65B Certificate and 21 WhatsApp Screenshots;
Ex.P5 : Seizure Mahazar;
Ex.P5(a & : Signature of PW2 and PW6;
b)
Ex.P6 : Statement of PW3;
Ex.P7 : FSL Report & CD;
KABC0C0099572019
31 CC.No.52797/2019
Ex.P8 : Report of CW9;
Ex.P8(a) : Signature of PW6.
List of witnesses examined for accused:
D.W-1 : Kiran Raghu
Ex.P1(a) : Signature of PW.1
Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar
Ex.P2(a) : Signature of PW.1
List of documents marked for accused:
Ex.D1 : E-mail copy;
Ex.D2 : Reply to the E-mail;
Ex.D3 : E-mail copy.
List of material objects marked:
M.O.1 : HTC Desire Mobile Phone
ANJALI V Digitally signed
by ANJALI V S
S SHARMA
Date: 2026.05.04
SHARMA 12:09:11 +0530
(ANJALI SHARMA.V.S)
X A.C.J.M., BENGALURU.
KABC0C0099572019
32 CC.No.52797/2019
ORDERS ON SENTENCE
1. I have heard both sides.
2. Learned Sr. Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the accused sexually harassed PW1 and threatened her and that the accused may be awarded maximum punishment as prescribed under law.
3. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for Advocate appearing for the accused prays for taking leniency by considering the fact that he is married and has a child.
4. Factual matrix of the case is that, accused being the manager of PW1 at Monster.Com company in 2016, sexually harassed PW1 by sending her sexually coloured messages and requested for sexual favours in turn for her job and even threatened her. The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed offence u/s 354A & 506 of IPC.
5. This Court found that the accused is guilty for the offences punishable under Section 354A(ii) & (iv) of IPC. Offence punishable under Section 354A IPC carries sentence of imprisonment rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both where offence is within clause (i), (ii) & (iii); and imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both where the offence is within clause (iv) of S.354A of IPC.
6. Section 248(2) of CrPC provides that, once the accused is found guilty, the Court has to explore if it can extend the benefit of section 360 of Cr.PC. Section 360 of CrPC is akin to Probation of Offenders Act. However, the offence committed is KABC0C0099572019 33 CC.No.52797/2019 against a woman. Victims of sexual harassment are scarred for life with trauma and negative effects on their psyche. They feel violated, powerless and have constant fear which may forever interfere with their relationships and social interactions. Hence, offence such as sexual harassment will not be tolerated. As such, there is no question of extending the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act and no leniency can be shown to the accused.
Therefore, following:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(2) of Cr.P.C, Accused is convicted for the offences punishable under Section 354A, 506 of IPC.
Accused shall pay fine of Rs.2,500/- for the offence punishable under 506 of IPC and in default to pay the fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month.
Accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year with fine of Rs.7,500/- for the offence punishable under Section 354A of IPC and in default to pay the fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months.
The period of detention undergone by the accused shall be given set off.
Supply a free copy of the order to the accused.
KABC0C0099572019 34 CC.No.52797/2019 (Dictated to stenographer directly on to the computer, the transcript thereof is corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 22nd day of April 2026) Digitally signed by ANJALI V ANJALI V S SHARMA S SHARMA Date: 2026.05.04 12:09:33 +0530 (Smt. Anjali Sharma V.S) X ACJM, Bengaluru