Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Utterance of any word or making of any sound or gesture by a person, intending to insult the modesty of a woman, attracts the offence punishable under Section 509 I.P.C., if such act was made intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture shall be seen by such woman.

10. There is distinction between an act of merely insulting a woman and an act of insulting the modesty of a woman. In order to attract Section 509 I.P.C., merely insulting a woman is not sufficient. Insult to the modesty of a woman is an essential ingredient of an offence punishable under Section 509 I.P.C. The crux of the offence is the intention to insult the modesty of a woman.

(Emphasis supplied)

16. Quite evidently, for a prosecution under Section 509 IPC to sustain, it is imperative that there are definite allegations of insult to the modesty of woman or intrusion into her privacy and that merely insulting a woman is different from ABHISHEK GOYAL GOYAL Date:

2025.07.07 16:14:39 +0530 insulting the modesty of woman. Clearly, in the former case, the allegations would fall short to even make a prima facie case for the offence under Section 509 IPC. Reference, in this regard is made to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in Basheer v. State of Kerala, Crl.MC.No. 837 of 2010, dated 24.03.2016, wherein the Hon'ble Court, while quashing a proceeding under Section 509 IPC, remarked as under;

"3. The learned Magistrate, and also the learned Sessions Judge erred in law to find that this prosecution can proceed under Section 509 IPC. Mere insult will not attract Section 509 IPC. For a prosecution under Section 509 IPC there must be a definite allegation of insult to the modesty of woman or intrusion into the privacy of woman. Thus the allegation must involve modesty of woman or privacy of woman. Mere insult or false allegation will not attract a prosecution under Section 509 IPC. In Annexure A2 complaint the 2nd respondent does not have a case that the petitioners herein had insulted her modesty as a woman, or that they had intruded into her privacy in any manner. If at all the petitioners had spread or published any insulting and defamatory matters, she can initiate prosecution for defamation under Section 500 IPC, provided, the allegations would come under the definition of defamation under Section 499 IPC. Any way mere insult or insulting words, or abuse will not attract a prosecution under Section 509 IPC. In this case there is absolutely nothing in the complaint preferred by the 2nd respondent, or in the final report submitted by the police to indicate that the petitioners had in any manner insulted her modesty or intruded into her privacy. Merely insulting a woman is different from insulting the modesty of woman. The subject of insult for a prosecution under Section 509 IPC must be the modesty of woman and not the woman as such. When there is nothing to make out the essential elements of the offence under Section 509 IPC, the prosecution against the petitioners cannot proceed under the law. I find that the present prosecution is an abuse of legal and judicial process. If at all the 2 nd respondent has a grievance or complaint that the petitioners herein had made or published any defamatory material against her alleging misappropriation of amount, she will have to pursue Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK GOYAL GOYAL Date:

2025.07.07 16:18:20 +0530 of which fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 (thirty) days for the offence under Section 354A IPC; and rigorous imprisonment for a period of 02 (two) years for the offence under Section 509 IPC, is modified only to the extent that instead of rigrous imprisonment for a period of 02 (two) years for the offence under Section 509 IPC, the appellant would undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 02 (two) years for the offence under Section 509 IPC. Needless to reiterate that the sentences shall run concurrently, besides the appellant would be entitled to the benefit under Section 428 Cr.P.C./Section 468 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/BNSS. Further, it is directed that the fine deposited by the appellant be released to the victim/complainant, as compensation. Needless to further mention that though it holds highest regard for the decisions relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant in support of his contentions, however, the same would not come to the aid of the appellant, in the manner as proposed, as the facts and circumstances of the present case are clearly distinguishable.