Natural For Two Persons In Love To Hug & Kiss Each Other: Madras High Court Quashes Sexual Harassment Case Against Man

Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that to constitute an offence of sexual harassment, a man must have committed physical contact and made advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures. In the present case, the court noted that the love affair between the man and the woman was admitted and it was quite natural for two persons in love to hug and kiss each other.

“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. 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 said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Santhanaganesh seeking to quash the FIR registered against him by the All Women Police Station, Srivaigundam for the offence under Section 354 – A (1) (i) of the IPC.

It was alleged that the petitioner, who was in a love affair with the de facto complainant since 2020, had called her to a place on November 13, 2022. It was further alleged that when both of them were talking, the petitioner hugged the defacto complainant and kissed her. The complainant informed her parents and asked the petitioner to marry her. When the petitioner refused to marry her and started avoiding her, she gave a complaint which resulted in registration of the FIR.

The court noted that even if the allegations in the FIR were taken to be true, no offence had been made out against the petitioner and in such circumstances, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against him would result in abuse of process of law.

The court also noted that though it had asked the police to not file the final report, the police had filed the final report before the Judicial Magistrate which was taken on file. The court however noted that even if the quash petition was filed to quash the FIR, the court could exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC and quash the entire proceedings itself.

The court was thus inclined to exercise its powers under Section 482 CrPC and quash the proceedinsg against the petitioner.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.A.Albert James, Government Advocate

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 440

Case Title: Santhanaganesh v State and Another

Case No: Crl.O.P.(MD) No.611 of 2023