Quite Natural For Two Teenage Persons In Love Affair To Hug Or Kiss Each Other: Madras HC Quashes Case Against Accused U/S. 354A IPC
The Madras High Court has quashed a case of sexual assault registered against a 20-yr-old man under section 354-A(1)(i) of IPC and has clarified that it is quite natural for two persons in their teenage, who are having a love affair to hug or kiss each other.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice N.Anand Venkatesh said, “To constitute an offence under Section 354-A(1)(i) of IPC, a man must commit a physical contact and make advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures.”
Advocate G.Karuppasamy Pandian appeared for the Petitioner while Government Advocate A.Albert James appeared for the Respondent-State.
The case of the prosecution was that the petitioner and the second respondent had a love affair. It was alleged that the petitioner and the defacto complainant met in a lonely place where they were talking till midnight. During this time, the petitioner hugged the second respondent and kissed her. Thereafter, the petitioner refused to marry the defacto complainant and started avoiding her. It was under these circumstances that a complaint was lodged which resulted in registration of an FIR for the offence under Section 354-A(1)(i) of IPC.
At the outset, the Bench noted that the petitioner is aged about twenty years and the defacto complainant is aged about 19 years.
The Bench explained, “Even if the allegations are taken as it is, it is quite natural for two persons in the teenage, who are having a love affair to hug or kiss each other. By no stretch, this can constitute an offence under Section 354-A(1)(i) of IPC.”
The Court thus concluded that no offence had been made out against the petitioner even if the allegations made in the First Information Report were taken as it is. “Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner will result in abuse of process of law”, it said.
It was further noticed that the respondent Police had completed the investigation and filed a final report before the Judicial Magistrate which had been taken on file. “It is now well settled that even where the quash petition is filed to quash the First Information Report and a final report is filed, which is taken cognizance, this Court can still exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and quash the proceedings itself, if a case is made out”, the Bench further elucidated.
Thus, exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, the Bench quashed the proceedings pending on the file of the competent Court and allowed the Criminal Original Petition.
Cause Title: Santhanaganesh v. State [Crl.O.P.(MD) No.611 of 2023]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate G.Karuppasamy Pandian
Respondent: Government Advocate A.Albert James
