Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Pappu Pundlik Kharat and Shakuntalabai Pundlik Kharat, were the original accused in R.C.C. No. 1918 of 2016 pending before the trial court. They filed an application (Exh.20) seeking discharge from offences punishable under Sections 354A(1), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The trial court rejected the discharge application on 21st June 2017. The petitioners then filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 150 of 2017 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, which was also dismissed on 20th February 2018. Aggrieved, the petitioners approached the High Court by way of Criminal Writ Petition No. 484 of 2018. The High Court examined the material on record, including the complaint and the statements of witnesses. The court observed that the complainant, a woman, alleged that the petitioners had sexually harassed her, assaulted her, and criminally intimidated her. However, the court noted that the complainant continued to work with the petitioners for a considerable period after the alleged incident and did not lodge a complaint promptly. The court found that the allegations were vague and lacked corroborative evidence. The court held that the material on record did not make out a prima facie case against the petitioners for the offences alleged. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the orders of the trial court and the revisional court, and directed that the petitioners be discharged from the said offences.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Discharge - Prima Facie Case - Sections 354A, 323, 504, 506 IPC - The petitioners sought discharge from charges of sexual harassment and related offences. The court held that the material on record, including the complainant's own conduct of continuing to work and not reporting the incident promptly, did not make out a prima facie case against the petitioners. The court allowed the discharge application, setting aside the orders of the trial court and revisional court. (Paras 2-6) B) Indian Penal Code - Sexual Harassment - Section 354A - Outraging Modesty - The court examined the allegations under Section 354A IPC and found that the complainant's subsequent conduct of working with the accused and not lodging a complaint for over a month contradicted the claim of sexual harassment. Held that no prima facie case was made out. (Paras 3-5) C) Indian Penal Code - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506 - The court noted that the allegations of criminal intimidation were vague and unsupported by any contemporaneous evidence. The complainant's delay in reporting and continued association with the accused negated the element of threat. Held that discharge was warranted. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to be discharged from the offences punishable under Sections 354A(1), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in the absence of prima facie material.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the orders of the trial court dated 21st June 2017 and the revisional court dated 20th February 2018, and directed that the petitioners be discharged from the offences punishable under Sections 354A(1), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Law Points
- Discharge
- Prima facie case
- Sexual harassment
- Outraging modesty
- Criminal intimidation
- Section 354A IPC
- Section 323 IPC
- Section 504 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Standard of proof at framing of charge
