The Delhi High Court on Tuesday delivered a significant ruling in a case involving allegations of harassment against a school Vice-Principal. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma partly modified earlier orders of the lower courts, holding that one of the accused would indeed face trial under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with insulting the modesty of a woman.
Background
The case dates back to July 2013, when Shashi Bala, then Vice-Principal of a Delhi school, lodged a complaint against the school Principal and three teachers. She alleged that the Principal hurled abuses, attempted to assault her, and that the three staff members joined in by using obscene remarks and gestures.
Read also:- Supreme Court Reverses Gujarat High Court Order on 50 Lakh Cash, Returns Case Property to Trial Court
Her initial written complaints, however, did not name all the accused. Only later, in her detailed statements, she specifically alleged that teachers Hari Kishan, Anand Kumar, and Rajinder Kumar had abused and humiliated her. This delay and inconsistency became the foundation for the Magistrate and subsequently the Sessions Court to discharge the three teachers, while allowing charges against the Principal.
Court's Observations
Justice Sharma went through the multiple complaints filed by Bala between July 5 and July 21, 2013. The bench noted a clear gap between her first complaint, which mentioned only the Principal, and her later complaints that accused the other teachers.
"The fact that the names of respondent nos. 2 to 4 were disclosed in the complaint made on the very next day of the incident cannot be outrightly ignored," the court remarked.
Still, it stressed the importance of distinguishing between generic abusive language and words that actually attack a woman’s dignity.
Citing past Supreme Court rulings, the judge explained that Section 509 IPC is attracted only when there is intent to insult a woman's modesty, usually through remarks or gestures with sexual undertones. Words that are merely derogatory or linked to workplace threats do not automatically qualify.
Read also:- Supreme Court Quashes Dowry Cruelty FIR Against Nitin Ahluwalia, Citing Abuse of Process After Divorce
Decision
Applying this principle, the High Court drew a line between the accused. For Anand Kumar and Rajinder Kumar, the allegations of calling the complainant "Saali" or threatening her promotion were found insufficient to meet the Section 509 threshold. The judge observed these were condemnable abuses, but "lack the sexual connotation or suggestive element required" to qualify as outraging modesty.
However, the allegation against Hari Kishan stood on a different footing. The complainant claimed he called her "R@n_i", a word that, in the court’s view, carried a direct sexual slur and attacked her dignity as a woman.
Read also:- Big relief for Sikh couples, SC mandates states to register Anand Karaj marriages
"Such a term, when used, is bound to humiliate a woman and lower her in the estimation of others by attacking her very status as a woman," Justice Sharma held.
Accordingly, the court directed that Hari Kishan must face trial under Section 509 IPC, while the discharge of Anand Kumar and Rajinder Kumar was upheld.
With this, the High Court disposed of the petition, forwarding the matter back to the trial court for compliance.
Case Title: Shashi Bala v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Case No.: CRL.M.C. 1162/2019
