Court affirms conviction under IPC Section 509, emphasizing credibility of victim's testimony despite minor discrepancies and investigation lapses
In a significant ruling dated September 30, 2026, the Calcutta High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by Raj Kumar Jaiswal @ Bablu, affirming his conviction and six-month simple imprisonment sentence under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for outraging the modesty of a woman. The judgment, authored by Justice Uday Kumar, upheld the decisions of both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, which had found the accused guilty of making obscene gestures and uttering lewd remarks to the complainant, Snehil Gupta, in a public setting.
The case originated from incidents on March 10 and 11, 2014, when Raj Kumar Jaiswal, reportedly intoxicated, harassed Snehil Gupta and her husband at their residence in Kolkata. The pivotal event occurred on the evening of March 11, when Jaiswal allegedly intercepted the couple, mocked their childless marriage, and unzipped his pants while saying, "Mere ko ek chance do, tumko pregnant kardenge" ("Give me a chance, I will make you pregnant"). This act was held to be a clear insult to the modesty of the woman under Section 509 IPC.
Both courts below had relied heavily on the consistent and credible testimony of the complainant and her husband, who was an eyewitness to the incident. Despite minor discrepancies in peripheral details and the non-examination of certain independent witnesses, the courts found the core evidence unimpeachable. The High Court echoed this view, stating that the testimony of a victim of sexual harassment deserves a higher pedestal of trust and that minor contradictions do not undermine the essence of the truthful narrative.
The defense had challenged the conviction on grounds of investigative lapses, including failure to prepare a formal site plan, non-exhibition of General Diary entries, and absence of Call Detail Records (CDRs) verifying threatening phone calls. However, the High Court held that such procedural defects are not fatal to the prosecution's case when the ocular evidence is sterling and trustworthy.
The Court further rejected the defense argument regarding the absence of a prior motive, observing that in cases of sudden verbal and gestural outrage to modesty, criminal intent can be inferred from the immediate conduct of the accused. The offensive behavior itself manifests the necessary mens rea.
Emphasizing the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction, the Court stated it would not act as a second appellate body to reappreciate evidence unless the findings are perverse or suffer from gross miscarriage of justice. Finding no such irregularity, the Court dismissed the revision petition and directed the petitioner to surrender within four weeks to serve the sentence.
This ruling reinforces judicial recognition of the dignity and modesty of women, supporting victims' testimonies even amid minor evidentiary gaps, and underscores the principle that investigation flaws cannot override direct, credible eyewitness accounts.
Bottom Line:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 509 Insult to modesty of woman - Conviction upheld where accused, in drunken condition, unzipped his pants and told complainant "Mere ko ek chance do, tumko pregnant kardenge" - Testimony of victim corroborated by husband held trustworthy - Minor discrepancies, non-examination of independent witnesses, and investigation lapses not fatal - In revisional jurisdiction, concurrent findings not to be disturbed absent perversity.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 509; Sections 506, 114 IPC (mentioned but acquittal on 506); Sections 161, 164 CrPC (investigation and victim statement provisions); Sections 401, 482 CrPC (revisional jurisdiction)
Raj Kumar Jaiswal v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2991103
