{"id":355423,"date":"2025-08-02T15:30:07","date_gmt":"2025-08-02T10:00:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=355423"},"modified":"2025-08-04T17:42:53","modified_gmt":"2025-08-04T12:12:53","slug":"cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/","title":{"rendered":"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> The petitioner approached the Court seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from an FIR lodged over alleged workplace harassment, which had resulted in a chargesheet under Section 509<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019). The allegations pertained to incidents between 2016-2017, reported over a year after the complainant\u2019s resignation. A Single Judge Bench of Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee<\/span>, J., while allowing the petition, held that only using the words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d, did not demonstrate the requisite intention or knowledge which could lead to the conclusion that any alleged act of the petitioner constituted an insult to the complainant\u2019s modesty. The Court emphasised that mere harassment at workplace or abusing her at workplace might not constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC, unless essential ingredients were fulfilled.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

The complainant filed an FIR in October 2018 alleging that she was subjected to harassment and severe bullying at her workplace by the petitioner and his female crony. Initially registered under Sections 354 and 114 IPC, after completion of investigation, the investigating agency submitted charge sheet under Section 509 IPC. The petitioner argued that the instant FIR was lodged with a view to spite him because of a private and personal grudge such as professional rivalry, strenuous relation and with an oblique motive of implicating him in long and arduous criminal proceedings.<\/p>\n

The complainant also filed a complaint with the Internal Complaints Committee (\u2018ICC\u2019) of her former employer, alleging sexual harassment by the petitioner on her in terms of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/a> (\u2018Act of 2013\u2019). However, although the ICC was time-barred, it conducted a detailed and thorough enquiry into the allegations levelled against the petitioner, but since no evidence could be gathered against him, the ICC exonerated him of all charges.<\/p>\n

The complainant contended that she was publicly abused, humiliated and harassed causing her mental agony that affected her health. She further alleged that the petitioner was a habitual offender, and several instances of the same kind of allegation had been levelled against him. It was argued that if a delinquent had been discharged from the departmental proceeding at the instance of the internal committee, the same discharge could not be a ground for quashing of the criminal proceeding arising out of a same cause of action because two proceedings were separate.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision:<\/h3>\n

The Court examined the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and observed that to constitute such an offence, there must be an allegation that the action complained of had insulted the modesty of some particular woman or women and not merely of any class or order or section of women, however small. The Court noted that the FIR, the charge sheet and materials collected during investigation did not suggest any specific details of the words, sounds or gesture by which the petitioner allegedly insulated her modesty, nor it suggested how and when he intruded upon the complainant\u2019s modesty.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the complainant gave no probable explanation for the one-year delay in lodging the FIR. Moreover, the police could not seize documents or collect cogent evidence to support essential ingredients. Also, the FIR and investigation materials, including the statements recorded under Section 161<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> lacked any allegation of sound, gesture, or object exhibition. The Court further noted that the complainant only stated that the petitioner abused her during 2016\u20142017 but did not specify the nature of harassment or abuse, even before the Magistrate, to determine if a prima facie offence under Section 509 IPC was made out.<\/p>\n

The Court emphasised that unless there had been reference to specific words used, contextual details or any gesture, it was hardly possible to demonstrate that the petitioner had criminal intent to insult the modesty and\/or to establish any case against the petitioner. The Court highlighted that mere using the words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d, did not demonstrate the requisite intention or knowledge which could lead to the conclusion that any alleged act of the petitioner constituted an insult to the complainant\u2019s modesty.<\/p>\n

The Court relied on Radheshyam Kejriwal v. State of West Bengal, (2011) 3 SCC 581<\/a>, wherein it was held that in case of exoneration (adjudication proceeding\/departmental proceeding) on merits where allegation was found to be not sustainable and person held innocent, criminal prosecution on the same set of fact and circumstances could not be allowed to continue underlying principle being the higher standard of proof in criminal cases. The Court further emphasised that since it was not disputed that the allegations in both proceedings were identical and the petitioner was exonerated on merit, continuing the trial would be an abuse of the process of the court.<\/p>\n

The Court, while quashing the pending criminal proceeding allowed the petition, holding that to establish mens rea something better than vague statement was to be produced before the Court.<\/p>\n

[X v. State of West Bengal, 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 6172<\/a>, decided on 28-07-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Ayan Bhattacharjee, Senior Advocate, Md. Zohaib Rauf<\/p>\n

For the Opposite Parties:<\/span> Prasenjit Mukherjee, Saptarshi Chakraborty, Rajdeep Bosu, Debasish Roy, PP, Sreyashee Biswas, Puja Goswami<\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Mere using the words “harassed” or “abused”, in the overall conspectus of the case, does not demonstrate the requisite intention or knowledge which can lead to the conclusion that any alleged act of the petitioner constitutes an insult to the complainant’s modesty.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":355458,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2689,14131,44522,60251,44974,86514,86515,50918,32964,39728,73565,44393],"class_list":["post-355423","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-departmental-enquiry","tag-internal-complaints-committee","tag-justice-ajoy-kumar-mukherjee","tag-mental-harassment","tag-mere-gestures","tag-mere-words","tag-outraging-modesty","tag-section-354-ipc","tag-section-509-ipc","tag-vague-allegations","tag-workplace-harassment"],"yoast_head":"\nCal HC: Mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under S. 509 IPC | SCC Times | SCC times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court explained the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and held that mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under Section 509 IPC.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court explained the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and held that mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under Section 509 IPC.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-08-02T10:00:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-04T12:12:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/\",\"name\":\"Cal HC: Mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under S. 509 IPC | SCC Times | SCC times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-02T10:00:07+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-04T12:12:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Calcutta High Court explained the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and held that mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under Section 509 IPC.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cal HC: Mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under S. 509 IPC | SCC Times | SCC times","description":"Calcutta High Court explained the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and held that mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under Section 509 IPC.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC","og_description":"Calcutta High Court explained the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and held that mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under Section 509 IPC.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-08-02T10:00:07+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-04T12:12:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/","name":"Cal HC: Mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under S. 509 IPC | SCC Times | SCC times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp","datePublished":"2025-08-02T10:00:07+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-04T12:12:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Calcutta High Court explained the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC and held that mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence under Section 509 IPC.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Mere allegations of workplace harassment not offence"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/02\/cal-hc-mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence-under-section-509-ipc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Calcutta High Court: Vague allegations of workplace harassment by merely using words \u201charassed\u201d or \u201cabused\u201d insufficient to constitute offence under Section 509 IPC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Mere-allegations-of-workplace-harassment-not-offence.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":327749,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/01\/calcutta-hc-quashes-sexual-harassment-case-against-female-accused-says-offence-under-354a-ipc-gender-specific\/","url_meta":{"origin":355423,"position":0},"title":"\u2018Offence under S. 354A of IPC is gender specific and only a man can be prosecuted under the same\u2019; Calcutta HC quashes sexual harassment case against female accused","author":"Editor","date":"August 1, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"It was said that since all sub-sections of Section 354A of IPC start with the words \u2018a man\u2019, a female accused would not be covered under this Section.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339950,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/29\/filthy-language-insult-modesty-use-of-falls-under-section-506-ipc-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":355423,"position":1},"title":"\u2018Filthy language\u2019 examined in isolation without any context indicating intention to insult modesty, doesn’t fall under S. 506 IPC: SC","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 29, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt will be essential for the Court to carefully assess the evidence presented, in order to determine whether there is sufficient material to establish the intention and knowledge to insult the modesty of the complainant or, whether any act was intended to shock the sense of decency of the complainant\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"filthy language insult modesty","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/filthy-language-insult-modesty.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/filthy-language-insult-modesty.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/filthy-language-insult-modesty.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/filthy-language-insult-modesty.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":300720,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/04\/day-to-day-bickering-between-husband-wife-not-cruelty-under-section-498a-of-the-ipc-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":355423,"position":2},"title":"Day to day bickering between husband-wife does not amount to cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"September 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held that there were latches on the part of the Trial Court in appreciation of evidence with regards to the alleged offence under Section 498A of the IPC.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":361656,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/25\/supreme-court-emphasises-on-caution-and-consideration-of-pragmatic-realities-by-courts-while-dealing-with-matrimonial-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":355423,"position":3},"title":"Supreme Court emphasises on caution and consideration of pragmatic realities by courts while dealing with matrimonial cases","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 25, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Court explained that mere general allegations of harassment and cruelty without pointing out the specific details would not be sufficient to continue criminal proceedings against any person\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"exercise caution in considering matrimonial cases","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/exercise-caution-in-considering-matrimonial-cases.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/exercise-caution-in-considering-matrimonial-cases.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/exercise-caution-in-considering-matrimonial-cases.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/exercise-caution-in-considering-matrimonial-cases.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":304131,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/09\/magistrate-duty-bound-to-scrutinise-complaint-under-sec-200-of-crpc-even-if-lodged-by-public-servant-cal-hc-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":355423,"position":4},"title":"Magistrate duty bound to scrutinise complaint under Section 200 of CrPC, even if lodged by Public Servant: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"October 9, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court stressed the importance of ensuring that the complaint is not false, vexatious, or intended to harass the accused.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":346608,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/28\/andhra-pradesh-high-court-sister-in-law-taunting-not-conceiving-s-498a-ipc-dowry-act-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":355423,"position":5},"title":"Sister-in-law taunting for not conceiving not a ground for S. 498A IPC & Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act charges to sustain: Andhra Pradesh High Court","author":"Arunima","date":"April 28, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The only reference to petitioners 3 and 4 is that, during visits to the accused No. 1 and third respondent\u2019s home, they taunted her for not being able to conceive. Such vague allegations, without specific dates or details, cannot withstand legal scrutiny.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Andhra Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/355423","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=355423"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/355423\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/355458"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=355423"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=355423"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=355423"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}