LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
The Indian Constitution Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Shubham sethi (director)     20 November 2013

Misuse of ipc 354

Hello I am sethi running a small guesthouse in delhi

I am facing a lot of problems at work, from my female staff

She is blackmailing me from not chucking her out by threatening to get a case registered against me

Just came across this website and saw people getting good advise

I have no clue what my rights are. I am very scared as I have done nothing and this girl is threatening me.

My family knows about it and is supporting me but I want to know what are my options if she falsely tries to register a case of harassment against me.

I am of good character and have never been convicted or arrested for anything in my life.

How can I get rid of this girl and maintain my dignity

Please suggest



Learning

 14 Replies

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate)     20 November 2013

Mr. Sethi,

If she is your employee and you have appointed her on some basis, terminate her services by giving an order to this effect in writing, before that you may even issue show cause notice to her mentioning her undesirable activities which are deterrent to the company and ask her an explanation that why an action cannot be taken against her for her misconduct.  In case you have not appointed her through an appointment letter and has absorbed just like that, after proper verification of her background, lodge a formal complaint against her in a local police station stating that she is upto some mischief of extorting money from you adopting some illegal steps including filing a false complaint against you u/s 354, hence to take an action against her, hope this will solve the purpose.

ABDUL RAZIQUE (Advocate)     20 November 2013

Mr. Sethi 

As per my knowledge no one lady or girl raise any voice for self protection or demanding charge. So if u are a prestigious person handle the matter politely and if u be un success then take a shelter of law. 

laxmi kant joshi (instructor)     20 November 2013

1. immediately terminate her , if she had appointment through appointment letter then issue her a termination letter that her Services are no more required because of non satisfactory work , give her one month notice or if you had mention any time in the terms and condition in the appointment letter given to her or pay her the amount for that period , and also made a police complaint that the lady(name) one of my staff member threatening me to take back your termination letter , (as i had issued a termination letter to her for not satisfactory work) , otherwise i will file harassment and other case upon you , attach The photocopy of termination letter with this . 2. On The other hand if she filed sec .354 i.e for molesting in working place , she have to prove it .

Nadeem Qureshi (Advocate/ nadeemqureshi1@gmail.com)     20 November 2013

first try to settle the matter amicably and terminate her service from your company.  

U.S.SANJEEVA MURTHY (senior partner)     20 November 2013

Mr. Seti.    if the girl is your staff member,  you can terminate  and inform the local police of her blackmailing activity and to her guardian..     

1 Like

Sandeep Naik (Advocate)     20 November 2013

It is too difficult to digest  the fact that any lady will expose herself  without any reason . Being a director u r hiding certain facts. The reason could be otherwise than meets the eyes.

Shubham sethi (director)     20 November 2013

Sir today i fired her and she called the police and filed a case against my receptionist and guard as they told her that she has been fired. Now i am very worried about my staff as they have been put in such a situation. Again i am confused what is to be done now as the complaint has been registered. We have given the cctv footage but it does cover the full area I think she did not file the case against me becaus i do not go to my hotel Please suggest how to save my staff

Shubham sethi (director)     20 November 2013

Cctv does not cover the whole premesis

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate)     20 November 2013

Your queries contradict each other.  You first stated that she is threatening  blackmailing you and intends to file a case against you, now when advocate Mr. Sandeep Naik  through his reply given below tried to expose you, you are taking a U turn, what are you upto?

'It is too difficult to digest  the fact that any lady will expose herself  without any reason . Being a director u r hiding certain facts. The reason could be otherwise than meets the eyes.'

Honest people will get proper reply in this forum.

Shubham sethi (director)     20 November 2013

Sir i can assure you that everything stated in this forum by me is the truth and i will get the fir as soon as it is filed will give you the fir no for proof the complaint has been registeted and dd no has been noted. Yes she threatened me only but when my staff did not let her enter the hotel premises in the morning she called 100 and lodged a complaint against the present staff. Rest it is upto you about trust, as it can not be forced will be goin to court tomorrow for consultation also. I will definetly post all the details on this forum so that troubled people like me can read my case and act accordingly. The only point i missed out was that a union has been formed in my hotel and i think those people are behind it. My managers and guards are the only people who are not a part of this union. For those people who have given me their waluable time and suggestions i am very thankfull and would love your continuous support.

angad (student)     12 January 2015

my name is Angad Pahwa. i am a law student in dehradun n currently in ludhiana for the internship programe . in my internship i have to collect the name n contact information (eg;- phone number or email address) of the people who have been the victim of false allegations of sec354 of IPC.

i request all the members under this club to allow me to get the information that i require to fulfill my assignment. 

Rameshwar Welfare Trust is the NGO with whom i am associated for this internship and that will verify my honesty regarding the motive to collect the information of the victims of false allegation of Sec354 of ipc.

above all this NGO wants to give a helping hand to the victims to recover menatlly from that hard part of life.

thankyou everyone.

Harpreet Singh   06 June 2016

Hi my name is Singh and am currently facing an FIR under section 354 A and 354 D, 506,509.

My sister got married in Nov 2014 and was abandoned by her inlaws in Jult 2015, she was 7 monts pregnant at that time, husband has filed a petition for the annulment of marriage in august 2015. When we logged a complaint under section 498 and 406 in CAW cell they started threatning by updating the status as Apni bachi to lunga hi aur tum sabko jail bhi bhijwaunga. in Nov 2015 his sister tried to snatch the girl child from my sister while we were in the market but could not succeed and immediately went to the police station and filed a complaint that she has been eve teased when we reached the PS she was already there and she had hidden my identity and stated that she didnt knew me, at that time a compromise was arived upon, but in Feb 2016 when her brother was about to face an FIR against him under the complaint logged by us at CAW cell she some how got the case against me registered again with much more charges including staling and threats of greavious heart. all the mediations have failed because they saw that they will withdraw the annulment petition only on the day of appering for second motion, now our family is very much under pressure and a constant threat is maintained by the other side. can any one suggest how these things can be resolved. we are in no situation to fight the law suit. please advice.

Harpreet Singh   06 June 2016

Hi my name is Singh and am currently facing an FIR under section 354 A and 354 D, 506,509.

My sister got married in Nov 2014 and was abandoned by her inlaws in Jult 2015, she was 7 monts pregnant at that time, husband has filed a petition for the annulment of marriage in august 2015. When we logged a complaint under section 498 and 406 in CAW cell they started threatning by updating the status as Apni bachi to lunga hi aur tum sabko jail bhi bhijwaunga. in Nov 2015 his sister tried to snatch the girl child from my sister while we were in the market but could not succeed and immediately went to the police station and filed a complaint that she has been eve teased when we reached the PS she was already there and she had hidden my identity and stated that she didnt knew me, at that time a compromise was arived upon, but in Feb 2016 when her brother was about to face an FIR against him under the complaint logged by us at CAW cell she some how got the case against me registered again with much more charges including staling and threats of greavious heart. all the mediations have failed because they saw that they will withdraw the annulment petition only on the day of appering for second motion, now our family is very much under pressure and a constant threat is maintained by the other side. can any one suggest how these things can be resolved. we are in no situation to fight the law suit. please advice.

Nitish Banka (lawyer)     30 June 2018

Posted by: Nitish Banka  Categories: Uncategorized 
 

 

Misuse of Section 354 ipc: Alarming for Indian men

The term “outraging the modesty of women” is not defined in 354 ipc.

“Even if you keep your hand on the shoulder of a woman, it is for the lady to comment on the nature of the touch, whether it was friendly, brotherly or fatherly,” said Bombay High Court Justice Naresh Patil, ruling against Machindra Chate’s appeal urging the court to squash an FIR filed under Section 354 IPC of the Indian Penal Code.

This seemingly pro-women pronouncement ought to hearten those of us concerned about s*xual harassment, except it does not.

The problem here is that even the bare facts of the alleged crime committed by Chate do not appear to rise to the level of a Section 354 offense. The owner of a chain of coaching classes is accused by the victim of abusing and pushing her away in “such a way that made her feel ashamed”. This inappropriate physical contact, however, occurred in the context of a heated altercation between Chate, students and their parents over syllabus-related issues — and in the presence of two other girls and a boy.

 

The question  is not of Chate’s innocence, as such. He may be guilty of straightforward assault and/or of violating Section 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) — which is the other charge filed against him. The issue here is whether such an act, however criminal, meets the standard of Section 354 ipc which states: “Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either descripttion for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”

The term “outrage the modesty” is, of course, wide open to interpretation, but the Supreme Court did offer some clarity in a 2007 judgement. The Times of India reported at the time:

For over a century courts have tried thousands for the offence of “outraging the modesty” of a woman without a precise definition of what constitutes a woman’s ‘modesty’. And now, the Supreme Court has finally defined modesty. Its definition: “The essence of a woman’s modesty is her s*x.”

The result of the labour of the Bench comprising justices Arijit Pasayat and SH Kapadia will help fill a glaring void in the Indian Penal Code, 1860, but the scope of the definition of ‘modesty’ as mentioned in Section 354 appears to go far beyond what framers of the code possibly had in mind.

“The act of pulling a woman, removing her saree, coupled with a request for s*xual intercourse…would be an outrage to the modesty of a woman; and knowledge, that modesty is likely to be outraged, is sufficient to constitute the offence,” the Bench said in a judgement that has drawn from several verdicts by different courts.

 

By this  standard, Chate’s alleged crime does not meet the criteria of Section 354 primarily because there is no evidence that the inappropriate contact had anything to do with the s*x of the victim. As Chate’s lawyer argued in court, “It was a scuffle, where was the intent to molest her?”

In response, the judges referred to the infamous KPS Gill who was convicted under Section 354 for slapping the posterior of Rupan Deol at a party, using his conviction to conclude, “To say there was no intention [to outrage modesty] is not possible.” It takes great judicial latitude to compare slapping a woman’s behind in a state of inebriation to shoving her in the course of an argument. And even more so to further conclude that even keeping a hand on a woman’s shoulder can be constituted as outraging her modesty — if she chooses to interpret is as such.

 

This kind of “enlightenment”—which violates the intent of the original law—does women no favours. It is precisely this kind of misuse of Section 354—both by the police who booked Chate under 354 when they had many other options and the court that has foolishly upheld the decision — that aids and abets the many misogynists who resist strengthening s*xual violence laws in this country. Much as the gross abuses of the anti-dowry act have long enabled so-called men’s rights activists to attack a much-needed law — and ignore the many victims of domestic violence.

False anti-dowry cases allow such men to play victim, and portray *all* women as conniving harridans ready to use their gender as a weapon. Cases like Chate will allow much the same to happen to Section 354, especially its revised subsections which allow a broader interpretation of s*xual offenses. But as this case shows, the blame lies not with women per se—many of whom are real victims of s*xual and domestic violence, and whom the law often fails to protect—but with the authorities who deploy the Indian Penal Code at their personal whim.

Writing on the issue of free speech (and the poor protection it receives in our courts), Suhrith Parthasarathy writes, “But, collectively, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence in allowing speech to thrive is so poor as to make the prospect of restraining prior governmental action or more principled decisions from the lower judiciary an abandoned dream. The court seems to lack the philosophical bent of mind to consider certain rights as inviolable, as superior to the impulses of the majority.”

This inability to carefully consider the intent of the law, and assess the weight of an individual complaint afflicts our courts across the board. This is why we get a bewildering variety of verdicts which rely not on true jurisprudence but the arbitrary interpretation of the individual judge. Where one can decry s*x before marriage as immoral, the other can deem a hand on the shoulder as potentially s*xual. One set of High Court judges can overthrow Section 377 while another pair at the Supreme Court can reinstitute it with equal ease. The result is a judicial system that fails to protect the spirit and intent of the laws it is entrusted to uphold. Justice becomes just another game of russian roulette, luck of the judicial draw.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query