Indian courts, clearly reported
Download today’s paperArchives
Karnataka High Court

Karnataka High Court says body-shaming, abusive remarks alone do not attract Section 509 IPC

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that allegations of body-shaming, offensive remarks and verbal abuse, without more, cannot automatically amount to the offence of insulting a woman’s modesty under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Justice SR Krishna Kumar quashed criminal proceedings against two women accused in Bengaluru of verbally abusing and body-shaming another woman, holding that the allegations did not satisfy the essential ingredients required to invoke Section 509 IPC.

The provision deals with words, sounds, gestures or acts intended to insult a woman’s modesty, besides conduct that intrudes upon her privacy. An offence under the provision could attract imprisonment of up to three years and a fine.

The case stemmed from a complaint lodged in August 2023 by a 26-year-old woman. She alleged that two women and a man had abused her and her friends the previous night, using what she described as fat-shaming, body-shaming, racist and vulgar remarks. The alleged incident was said to have caused mental distress to the complainant and her friend.

Police registered an FIR under Section 509 IPC and subsequently filed a chargesheet, resulting in proceedings before a Bengaluru magistrate.

The High Court, however, found that the allegations did not disclose the specific elements necessary to constitute an offence under Section 509.

The Court observed that merely accusing the petitioners of body-shaming the complainant or making insulting comments about her physical appearance was insufficient to establish the offence.

The Court also took note of an earlier order concerning another accused in the same incident. Proceedings against the third accused had already been quashed by the High Court in June 2024. Since the allegations against the two women before the Court were substantially the same, the Court applied the principle of parity and extended similar treatment to them.

The proceedings against the two petitioners were accordingly quashed.

Advocate Ankur Trripati appeared for the petitioners, while High Court Government Pleader Deepthi Alva represented the State of Karnataka.

Share this story