Calcutta High Court, calling an unidentified woman ‘darling’ is a form of sexual harassment under Section 354A IPC
Last Updated on March 4, 2024 by News Desk
Issue:
The Calcutta High Court considered whether calling an unidentified lady “darling” violates Section 354A(i) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as a sexually explicit statement.
Facts of the Case:
In Janak Ram v. State of West Bengal, the appellant was found guilty of calling a female police officer “darling” while under the influence of alcohol. On the eve of Durga Puja, the event happened during a police operation to uphold law and order. A First Information Report (FIR) was filed in response to the appellant’s comment under Sections 354A(1)(iv) and 509 of the IPC.
Arguments Presented by Parties:
The appellant argued that the event did not provide any evidence of his drunkenness. Furthermore, it was contended that the epithet “darling” had any inherent offensiveness or sexual connotations. Citing sections of the IPC, the prosecution countered that such words amounted to outraging a woman’s modesty.
Judgment Delivered by Court:
The conviction of Janak Ram by the lower court was maintained by the Calcutta High Court, which was presided over by Justice Jay Sengupta, a single judge. According to Section 354A(i) of the IPC, Justice Sengupta considered calling an unidentified woman “darling” to be insulting and sexually suggestive. The court made it clear that such remarks targeting gullible women are unacceptable under current social norms.
The court determined that the prosecution’s evidence—especially that from police officers on the scene—was sufficient, while noting the absence of independent witnesses. The court reduced the appellant’s sentence from three months to one month of incarceration even though there were no aggravating circumstances.
Case title: Janak Ram vs State of West Bengal
Written By: Nikita Shankar @nikitaashankar
