Insulting woman, not behaving in chivalrous manner wouldn’t amount to outraging modesty: Delhi HC

livemint.com:

₹1,000 and called her ‘gandi aurat’ (dirty woman). Both, the complainant woman and the man were working in the same organisation and the man was her senior.

In its order, the high court said the word ‘gandi aurat’, if read in isolation, without context, without any preceding or succeeding words indicating intent to outrage the modesty of a woman, will not bring these words within the ambit of section 509 of IPC. “Had there been any mention of any other words used, context given or any other gesture etc.

made accompanying, succeeding or preceding these words, reflecting criminal intent to outrage the modesty of a woman, the outcome of the case would have been different," it said. Gender-specific laws are not meant to be “anti-opposite gender" but to serve the purpose of addressing unique issues faced by a particular gender, the high court said.

“Gender-specific legislation exists to address the unique concerns and challenges faced by particular genders within society. However, this does not imply that the judge is to be influenced or swayed by gender-related factors when administering justice unless specific presumptions are legislated in favour of a particular gender in law," Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.

“In essence, judicial neutrality is an indispensable cornerstone of the legal system, ensuring that all parties, regardless of gender, are treated fairly and equitably," Justice Sharma also said. (With inputs from PTI)