A woman has always placed the highest value on her dignity and sense of self-respect. In light of this, section 354 of the indian penal code (1860) was created in order to protect women’s dignity from offensive comments and other forms of harassment that could overtly or covertly offend their modesty.
state of punjab vs major singh Case Facts
- Approximately 9 to 30 p.m. Turning out the light, Major Singh entered the baby’s sleeping quarters. He got down on his knees over her, nude below the waist.
- He let out his abnormal lust in this lewd position, rupturing the hymen and creating a 3/4-inch-long tear with his finger in the process. When the baby’s mother came in and turned on the light, he fled.
- She observed blood seeping from the young child’s intimate organs. The girl was just seven and a half months old.
- After being apprehended, Major Singh was charged under Section 323 and section 354 of the indian penal code.
state of punjab vs major singh Issues
- Whether Major Singh, the respondent, is guilty of violating the modesty of a woman under section 354 of the indian penal code by injuring the private parts of a seven and a half-month-old girl
- What does the code signify when it says “woman”?
- When do women start to become modest?
- Regarding section 354 of ipc, it is relevant to consider if the victim’s age, physical state, attitude, or the use of force against her are relevant factors.
- Should the woman’s response be regarded as the deciding factor or not?
state of punjab vs major singh Judgment
- A three-judge Supreme Court panel ruled in State of Punjab v. Major Singh that harm to a seven and a half-month-old girl’s vagina can result in an accused person being found guilty of outraging modesty under Section 354 of the law.
- Sarkar, C.J., the judge, interpreted that a woman’s modesty should be taken into account in addition to her response if an act was performed knowing or with the purpose of upsetting her. All women lack modesty, which might infuriate and cause the petition to be rejected.
- The second judge, Mudholkar, cited the term “modesty” to apply not to a specific woman but to social norms and accepted ideas of what it means to be a woman. section 354 of ipc conviction was upheld, and it doesn’t matter if the woman is capable of understanding or not.
- According to Judge Bacbawat, J., the term “woman” refers to any female human being, regardless of age. The fundamental issue was the guilty intent to offend modesty, and Mudholkar’s directive was accepted.
- Based on the majority’s decision, the appeal is granted, the respondent’s conviction is changed to one under section 354 of ipc., and he faces rigorous imprisonment for two years along with a fine of Rs. 1,000. If he doesn’t comply, he will also face rigorous imprisonment for six months. If the fine is realized, the child will receive compensation in the amount of Rs. 500/-.
- It is undeniable, according to Sarkar, C.J., that the respondent had used illegal force on the kid. Furthermore, there is no question that the child qualified as a woman under the Code because, as stated in Sections 77 and 10, “that word is to be understood as meaning a female human being of any age.” In this instance, the words “outrage her modesty” were a challenge.
- According to Mudholkar J and Bacbawat J, a woman’s sex is the core of her modesty. The term “womer” refers to a female human being regardless of age, they clarify. They stated that a woman has the modesty to be angry, regardless of her age, intelligence, or incompetence, and whether she is awake or asleep. In this instance, they think that a little girl is in a slightly different situation. Her sexuality is dormant, and her body is undeveloped.
- The victim in this instance is a seven and a half-month-old infant. She is unaware of sex and has not yet grown to feel ashamed. Nonetheless, she has had the modesty characteristic of her sex since birth.
This particular case highlights the terrible truth of modern society: a young girl, whose body is still developing and whose sexual abilities are dormant, can survive such an immoral crime. Therefore, in order to address sexual offenses, it is imperative that the term “outrage the modesty of women” be thoroughly understood and interpreted. This will be necessary in light of the IPC’s future requests for clarification on the matter from the courts.
With the goal of giving students the best coaching available for law entrance exams including the CLAT, AILET, and various other numerous state judiciary exams, Jyoti Judiciary Coaching, India’s Finest educational Platform, was established. Come enrol now with Jyoti Judiciary!
For any latest news, legal topics, judiciary exams notifications, patterns, etc watch Jyoti Judiciary’s YouTube channel for legal videos for any updates at https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=2cwubh9d2A9urwJf
