New Delhi: A Delhi court has observed that mentioning the looks and gait of a person without any specific reference to the dress or any body part would not be counted as a sexually coloured remark.
Additional Sessions Judge Rajinder Singh of Patiala House Courts made this observation while dismissing a woman’s plea against discharge of a man under Section 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Charges against two other men were framed under the same Section but they were discharged under Section 354A (sexual harassment).
The woman had alleged that the three men made offensive comments and certain remarks about her and also used to stare at her with an ‘evil eye’.
The court said that the alleged acts of the accused persons would not fall under Section 354A (1)(A) of the IPC while perusing the documents.
“The woman specifically mentioned that he was murmuring something but she did not stop there to hear,” the court said while discharging the accused under section 509 of the IPC.
The court also noted that there was no specific mention of any alleged words attributable to the man or no specific allegations that he made any sound or gesture or exhibiting any object intending it to be seen by the woman with the intention of insulting her modesty or intruding upon her privacy.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by Mansoor Hameed | 
