Court Rules That Mere Accidental Exposure While Answering Nature's Call Does Not Constitute Sexual Harassment Under Section 75(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
In a significant judgment delivered on September 1, 2026, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, quashed criminal proceedings against Anil Rohan Menezes, who was charged under Section 75(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) for allegedly exposing his private parts in public. The court held that accidental exposure without any sexual intent or overtone, especially when not directed towards a woman, cannot be construed as an offence under the said provision.
The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman alleging that the petitioner exposed himself near Hebbal while she was walking by. The police registered Crime No.35 of 2026 and filed a charge sheet against Menezes. The petitioner challenged the continuation of the prosecution through a criminal petition under the inherent powers of the High Court.
During the proceedings, the petitioner's counsel contended that the exposure was purely accidental and occurred while the petitioner was responding to an urgent call of nature by the roadside, unable to find a public toilet. The petitioner was unaware of the complainant's presence at that moment, and there was no sexual intent or conduct aimed at the complainant.
The complainant's counsel argued that some gestures accompanied the exposure and that the matter should be tried in a full trial. The State also opposed quashing the proceedings.
However, the court meticulously analyzed the facts and the charge sheet and noted that the complaint and investigation did not reveal any deliberate or intentional act of exposure with sexual intent directed at the complainant. The court emphasized that criminal law requires the presence of mens rea-sexual intent-and mere accidental exposure without such intent, even if witnessed by a woman, cannot be criminalized.
Justice Nagaprasanna referred to the landmark Supreme Court judgment in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp. 1 SCC 335), laying down principles for quashing proceedings that do not prima facie disclose an offence and prevent abuse of the legal process. Applying these principles, the High Court concluded that permitting the prosecution to continue would amount to a miscarriage of justice and an abuse of process.
Consequently, the court allowed the criminal petition and quashed the proceedings registered as C.C.No.14887/2026 before the 7th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru.
This ruling clarifies that under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 75(2), the act of accidental exposure without sexual intent is not punishable, reaffirming the necessity of mens rea and the contextual circumstances for constituting the offence of sexual harassment.
Bottom Line:
Accidental exposure of private parts without sexual intent or overtone, and not directed towards a woman, cannot constitute an offence under Section 75(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Statutory provision(s): Section 75(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (as referred through Bhajan Lal case principles)
Anil Rohan Menezes v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2974755
