Traditional Families Hesitant To Report Crimes Involving Dignity Of Young Woman: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has highlighted the hesitancy of traditional families to report cases concerning the dignity of young women to the police, fearing it might jeopardize their own honour. The court emphasized that a slight delay in lodging an FIR in such cases should not be deemed fatal for the prosecution case.

“…Wherein dignity of a woman that too of a younger age is involved, the traditional families are hesitant to report such matters to the police putting their honour and dignity also at stake, therefore the delay of a single day in lodging of FIR, in the considered opinion of this court, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be inordinate delay, so as to be fatal for the prosecution case”, Justice M A Chowdhary observed.

The observations were made while hearing an appeal directed against the judgment of Sessions Court convicting the appellant under Sections 354,323 and 341 RPC (he was acquitted of offences alleged under Sections 376/511 RPC).

As per the complaint, accused assaulted and outraged modesty of posecutrix while she was returning from school. The timely intervention of a witness prevented any further harm to the young girl, it was alleged.

The appellant contended that he was convicted for an offence under Section 354 of the RPC without a formal charge, which was impermissible. The appellant further submitted that the delay in lodging the FIR was fatal to the prosecution's case and that the absence of the exact place of occurrence in the charge sheet was not curable.

Justice M. A. Chowdhary dismissed the contention regarding the absence of a formal charge under Section 354 of the RPC. While doing so the court cited Section 236 of the J&K CrPC, which allows a court to convict an accused for an offence with which he was not charged, based on the evidence adduced during the trial.

“Mere omission or defect in framing the charge does not disable the court from convicting the accused of the offence which is found to have been proved on the basis of the evidence on record”, the bench explained.

Regarding the contention on the delay in lodging the FIR, the bench noted that the father of the prosecutrix was stated to be away at Doda in connection with his government job and had returned on being intimated in the evening only and after consultation in the family had reported the commission of offence to the police next day. It has also come on record that the matter was also under consideration of local panchayat before being reported to the police station, the bench pointed.

The court further highlighted the sensitive nature of offences against women, especially when younger victims are involved and acknowledged that traditional families are often hesitant to report such matters immediately, as it may jeopardize the victim's honor and dignity. A delay of one day in lodging the FIR could not be considered inordinate and, thus, did not render the prosecution's case fatal, the bench underscored.

In response to the contention about the lack of mention of the exact place of occurrence in the charge sheet, the court observed,

“It appears from the cross examination of all the witnesses that no such question had been asked to any of the witnesses with regard to the exact place of occurrence by the defense. Therefore, raising of this contention at this stage, in the considered opinion of this court, is not relevant”.

Having regard to the above observations the bench found the appeal bereft of any merit and dismissed the same.

Case Title: Subash Chander Vs State of J&K

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

Ckick Here To Read/Download Judgment