Bombay High Court grants pre-arrest bail to three accused charged with outraging modesty of women by whistling at her from their terrace

The Bombay High Court's Aurangabad division has granted pre-arrest bail to three defendants who were accused of insulting a woman's modesty by whistling at her from their terrace.

Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court grants pre-arrest bail to three accused charged with outraging the modesty of a women by whistling from terrace

The Court stated,

"Merely because some sound is created by a person in his house, we cannot directly infer that it is with such an intention that it is with a sexual nature towards the woman."

Other charges labeled against the accused were:

• Outraging the modesty of a women through assault
• Stalking
• Provoking
• Breach of peace and criminal intimidation

Ahmednagar residents Laxman, Yogesh, and Savita Pandav appealed the Newasa Sessions judge's denial of anticipatory bail under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act before the bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Abhay Waghwase. The additional allegations included assault, stalking, inciting a breach of peace, and criminal intimidation against a woman's modesty.

Also Read: Global economy is projected to grow 1.9% in 2023: UN

FIR states that accused was their neighbors

According to the First Information Report, the complainant and the accused were neighbours, and she claimed that Yogesh used to look at her in a way that offended her modesty. On November 28, 2021, she discovered Yogesh photographing her from his phone outside his house, and her husband had seen it from close to their front gate. Previously, she had ignored Yogesh's behaviour.

Husband complains against Yogesh to his landlord

Her husband had complained to his landlord about Yogesh, but the landlord paid little attention. Additionally, she claimed that Yogesh was defaming her and her family by showing video footage of them to neighbours and that the accused had also abused her in a casteist manner. She said she was still trying to ignore Yogesh, but between March 21 and March 23, 2022, Yogesh began whistling and making noises with his mouth and even cutlery from the terrace. Additionally, he kept using his car's reverse horn nonstop.

Women alleges that CCTV camera of Yogesh’s house placed in such a manner that entire activity of her house could be captured

She claimed that even Yogesh's home's CCTV camera was positioned so that it would record all of her home's activities. She stated that her head had been injured as a result of Yogesh and his family throwing stones at her on March 24; her watchman had seen this happen. The woman claimed that when she went to question the accused about the incident, the accused abused her caste and threatened to harm her if she made a formal complaint.

FIR filed after three months after the incident

The Pandav family's attorney, NB Narwade, emphasised that the FIR was submitted three months after the incident. According to him, the FIR against the Pandav family was only filed after they had already filed one against the woman and her husband.

FIR filed by women was sheer “misuse of caste” and “nothing but an act of vengeance”

He claimed that the woman's FIR was simply "a misuse of caste" and "nothing but an act of retaliation." He claimed that although the landlord was unwilling, the woman and her husband wanted to buy the home where the Pandav family is currently renting it.

But after considering each of the alleged Pandav instances, the court stated, "With regard to the incidents between March 21 and March 23, last year,
"Those acts appeared to have been committed from the house of the Pandavs and it cannot be even prima facie inferred that it was with some such nature. Merely because some sound is created by a person in his house, we cannot directly infer that it is with such an intention that it is with a sexual nature towards the woman."

Court notes that and her husband also shot videos of Pandav’s on their mobile

The bench considered the woman's delayed filing of the FIR and declared that the Pandavs' earlier complaint could not be disregarded. The woman and her husband had also recorded videos of the Pandavs on their mobile device, the court heard noted.

"Sufficient material is before this court to infer that the FIR has been lodged with an ulterior motive." The court declared in its ruling.

Also Read: Republic Day 2023: Egyptian army salutes the President

Keep watching our YouTube Channel ‘DNP INDIA’. Also, please subscribe and follow us on FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, and TWITTER.