Now, showing middle finger to woman can land you in jail

According to a recent Court Judgment, showing the middle finger to a woman can land you in jail.

In this case, a man has been found guilty of gesturing at a woman with his middle finger besides making obscene facial expressions.

Metropolitan Magistrate Vasundhara Azad said, “This undeniably amounts to making utterances or gestures intending to insult the modesty of a woman".

The accused is the brother-in-law of the woman who registered the complaint, the accused now stares at a maximum punishment of three years in jail & a fine.

The woman filed a complaint alleging the man had showed her his middle finger besides passing lewd remarks & also physically hurting her on May 21, 2014. Following an investigation, Police booked the man under IPC sections 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman) & 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt).

On Oct 8, 2015, the Court framed charges against the man, who pleaded not guilty & claimed trial. The prosecution examined four witnesses, including the complainant. In her testimony, she reiterated the allegations & claimed that the man had also slapped her.

But the man continued to oppose all allegations, claiming the case was the result of a property dispute between them, & sought to examine his sister in his defence. The witness testified that her brother was at home the whole day & the woman had filed a false complaint.

While dealing with the allegation of outraging modesty, the Judge noted that the complainant had “specifically stated in her testimony” that the accused showed her his middle finger, made obscene facial expressions towards her & also passed lewd remarks. Highlighting the woman’s medico-legal case (MLC) report, which showed a “linear bruise”, the Court held, “The consistent testimony of the woman regarding hurt caused to her has been duly corroborated by her MLC.”

No evidence about the property conflict claim, which was declined by the woman was found by the Court.

The Court said, “There is no material on record to disbelieve the testimony of the complainant". 

A conviction, the Judge said, could be based on the sole testimony of the survivor if the same was “trustworthy”, “reliable” & “worthy of credence”. “It is quality, not quantity or number of witnesses, that matters,” she pointed out.

The Court also denied the defence witness’ testimony as she was not at home at the time of the incident while she claimed her brother was. All necessary elements against the man were proved beyond reasonable doubt, it said. “Accused stands convicted,” Judge Azad said.

On Tuesday, the Court will hear arguments on the quantum of sentence.

Source Link