IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.5465 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
Sri. Giri Govind Shanmugam S/o Dr. A.V. Shanmugam, Aged 52 years, R/at No.676, 9th ‘A’ Cross, WOC Road, 2nd Stage, Mahalakshmipuram, Bengaluru – 560 086.
Also at:
Associate Professor Commerce Department Sheshadripuram Evening College, Sheashadripuram, Bengaluru – 560 020. …Petitioner (By Sri. Pallava .R, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka By Sheshadripuram Police Station, Sheshadripuram,, Bengaluru – 560 020.
2. Sri. Wooday P. Krishna General Secretary, Sheshadripuram Education Trust, No.27, Nagappa Street, Sheshadripuram, Bengaluru – 560 020. ...Respondents (By Sri. Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP for R1; Sri. R. Nataraj, Advocate for R2-Absent) This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.12739/2015 on the file of VIII ACMM, Bengaluru which is given at Annexure-A.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner was the Assistant Professor at Seshadripuram Evening College. The Secretary of the said college lodged a report on 10.02.2015 in respect of the incident that is alleged to have taken place on 06.02.2015 in the class room between 6.00 p.m. and 6.15 p.m. After investigation, charge-sheet has been laid against the petitioner under Section 509 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.02.2015 during class hours between 6.00 p.m. and 6.15 p.m., the petitioner herein abused CW.4 using filthy language and thereby humiliated her in front of entire class, as a result, CW.4 fainted in the class room due to low blood pressure and she was taken to Maruthi Nursing Home by her classmates.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner at the outset submitted that the allegations made in the compliant and in the charge sheet do not attract the ingredients of Section 509 of IPC. Neither CW.4 nor the complainant have disclosed the specific utterance alleged to have been made by the petitioner. There is no material to show that petitioner has used any words or utterance with an intent to outrage the modesty of CW.4. Under the said circumstances, the submission of charge-sheet against the petitioner and cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate for the offence under Section 509 of IPC is baseless and is an abuse of process of the Court and thus, seeks to quash the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioner.
4. Learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.1 argued in support of the impugned action contending that the material produced by the Investigating Agency prima-facie disclose commission of the above offence and hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.
5. Respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented.
6. In order to constitute the offence under Section 509 of IPC, the accused should utter any word or make any sound or gesture or exhibit any object, with an intention that such words or sound shall be heard or such gesture or object shall be observed or seen by the woman or that the accused must intrude upon the privacy of such a person. In the instant case, the entire case of the prosecution is based on the incident that is alleged to have taken place in the class room. A reading of the complaint and charge-sheet does not mention any specific words or utterances made by the petitioner. On the other hand, the case of the prosecution is that while discussing the marks secured by CW.4 in the accounts subject, the petitioner, who was then the professor dealing with the subject used vulgar and filthy words against CW.4. The petitioner dealing with the subject, if for any reason, reprimanded CW.4 for not securing marks and in the process used any harsh words, the same does not fall within the ambit of Section 509 of IPC. The material on record indicate that CW.4 did not lodge any complaint regarding the incident nor the classmates of CW.4 have come up with any specific allegations against the petitioner, instead the Secretary of Society has set the law in motion. Even in the complaint, CW.4 has not reproduced the alleged statement or utterance made by the petitioner. Except stating that on account of the abuses hurled by the petitioner, CW4 lost conscious and was taken to the nursing home, she has not narrated any offending remarks touching the modesty of CW.4. Even though it is the case of the prosecution that on account of alleged incident, CW.4 fainted in the class room and was taken to Nursing Home, no material is collected to show the real cause of CW.4 fainting in the class room. In the absence of any such material, the case set up by the prosecution is rendered vulnerable.
7. That apart, the allegations made in the complaint and the charge-sheet and the supporting material produced by the prosecution, in my view, does not prima-facie make the ingredients of the offence under Section 509 IPC. I have gone through the statement of CW.4. In her statement, she has merely stated that since she secured only 53 marks in the accounts subject, petitioner herein abused and insulted her. This goes to show that the petitioner merely reprimanded CW.4 for securing low marks and nothing more. There is nothing in the statement of CW.4 to indicate that the petitioner herein used any words of utterance touching the modesty of the petitioner. In the absence of such material, prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offence under Section 509 of IPC is wholly baseless and cannot be sustained.
8. For the above reasons, prosecution launched against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Proceedings launched in C.C. No.12739/2015 on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru are quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE MBM