9437209559,9853309559.
>📱 Whatsapp's <
🌅 India Rising
Misuse of IPC Section 354 and Judicial Intervention by the Supreme Court
IPC Section 354, dealing with "assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty," is a significant legal provision aimed at protecting women. However, its misuse has become a matter of concern. The Supreme Court of India has recently expressed its worries regarding the misuse of Section 354 by unscrupulous elements, leading to false accusations and wrongful charges.
Background of IPC Section 354
IPC Section 354 is a non-bailable and cognizable offense, and the punishment under this section includes imprisonment up to two years, a fine, or both. The section is vital in protecting the dignity and modesty of women. Nevertheless, the law’s very intent has, at times, been subverted by false allegations for various motives, including personal vendettas, blackmail, and harassment.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court has taken note of the increasing misuse of this section, where individuals, particularly men, have been falsely implicated, leading to harassment and social stigma. The apex court has emphasized the need for more stringent scrutiny at the preliminary investigation stage to prevent such misuse.
In its recent rulings, the Supreme Court has highlighted that the presumption of innocence is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence. The Court stressed that this principle must be maintained unless the charges are substantiated with credible evidence. It has directed that while the protection of women is paramount, investigating agencies and courts must also ensure that innocent individuals are not framed or subjected to baseless criminal proceedings.
Challenges with Section 354
The core issue arises from the subjective nature of what constitutes an "outrage of modesty," which is often left to the interpretation of the victim and law enforcement agencies. This ambiguity can lead to its exploitation. The societal stigma attached to charges under this section further complicates matters, as even an unfounded allegation can ruin an individual’s reputation.
Moreover, the lack of rigorous preliminary investigation often results in the framing of charges based on flimsy or manipulated evidence. This not only leads to wrongful prosecutions but also undermines the genuine cases of harassment that deserve attention and justice.
Supreme Court’s Recommendations and Measures for Filtering Cases
To mitigate the misuse of IPC Section 354, the Supreme Court has recommended several measures that can be adopted by investigating agencies and judicial officers:
Stringent Scrutiny at the FIR Stage: The Court has advised that First Information Reports (FIRs) under Section 354 should be registered only after a thorough preliminary inquiry. The police should ensure that the complaint is backed by prima facie evidence and is not frivolous or motivated by malice.
Mandatory Review by Senior Officers: The Court suggested that FIRs under this section should be reviewed by a senior police officer before proceeding with the investigation. This review can act as a filter to eliminate cases that lack substantial evidence.
Guidelines for Evidence Collection: Investigating officers should follow stringent guidelines for evidence collection in cases under Section 354. This includes corroborating the victim's statement with other evidence, such as witness testimonies, CCTV footage, or forensic analysis.
Judicial Oversight: The Court emphasized the role of judicial oversight during the framing of charges. Judges should ensure that the charges are based on credible evidence and not merely on the complainant's statements. The judiciary must be cautious to prevent the law from being used as a tool for harassment.
Counseling and Mediation: In cases where there is a possibility of reconciliation, the Court suggested exploring avenues like counseling and mediation before proceeding with criminal prosecution. This approach could help resolve misunderstandings and avoid unnecessary legal battles.
Penalizing False Complaints: The Supreme Court also suggested that there should be strict penalties for individuals found guilty of lodging false complaints under Section 354. This could act as a deterrent against misuse and ensure that the law serves its intended purpose.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s recent interventions reflect a balanced approach, aiming to protect women’s rights while preventing the misuse of IPC Section 354. The Court has made it clear that while the protection of women is crucial, the rights of innocent individuals should not be compromised. The implementation of the Court's recommendations by investigating agencies and the judiciary can significantly reduce the misuse of Section 354, ensuring that justice is served in its true sense.
JaiHind.. 🇮🇳 JaiBharat..
Comments