Court Finds Lack of Intent in Allegations Against Budhu Murmu, Citing Insufficient Evidence Under Section 354 IPC
In a significant ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has set aside the conviction of Budhu Murmu, who was earlier sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly outraging the modesty of a minor. The judgment, delivered by Justice Rajesh Kumar, highlighted the absence of criminal intent as a decisive factor in overturning the previous conviction handed down by the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Seraikella Kharsawan.
The case stemmed from an incident on June 21, 2017, when the accused, Budhu Murmu, was alleged to have caught the hand of a 10-year-old girl, with intentions purportedly linked to marriage. The girl's father, Samar Kumar Hembrom, lodged a complaint leading to Murmu's arrest and subsequent conviction under Section 354 IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. However, the trial court acquitted him of the POCSO charge.
During the appeal hearing, the defense, represented by Mrs. Omiya Anusha, argued that the actions of the accused did not fulfill the necessary elements of Section 354 IPC, which requires an application of criminal force with the intent to outrage modesty. The High Court concurred, noting that the appellant's actions, as per the testimonies, merely involved a proposal of marriage without any accompanying evidence of bad intention or use of force to outrage modesty.
The judgment emphasized that mere proposals for marriage, even if accompanied by physical contact like holding a hand, do not constitute an offense under Section 354 IPC unless there is clear evidence of intent to outrage the woman's modesty. The court referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Naresh Aneja v. State of Uttar Pradesh, which underscored the necessity of proving mens rea or guilty intent in such cases.
The High Court's decision to overturn the conviction and sentence has been welcomed by the defense, emphasizing the importance of intent in determining guilt in cases of alleged modesty outrage. The appellant, who had already served his sentence, was released following the court's decision.
Bottom line:-
Section 354 IPC - Outraging modesty of a woman requires criminal force to be applied with the intent to outrage her modesty - Mere proposal for marriage without evidence of bad intention is insufficient to attract the ingredients of Section 354 IPC.
Statutory provision(s): Section 354 IPC, Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Budhu Murmu @ Gudu Murmu v. State of Jharkhand, (Jharkhand) : Law Finder Doc id # 2941479
