Section 79 of BNS

Source: Calcutta High Court 

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justice Dr Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee has held that mere harassment and abuse at the workplace would not attract the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (IPC). 

• The Calcutta High Court held this in the matter of X v. State of West Bengal (2025). 

What was the Background of X v. State of West Bengal, (2025) Case? 

• The opposite party filed an FIR alleging commission of offence punishable under section 354/114 of the IPC against four accused persons, including the petitioner, on the allegation that the accused persons caused harassment to the complainant at her workplace.  
• The complainant had joined employment with M/s. Bennett Coleman and Company Ltd. at its Delhi office as a trainee reporter in 2015, later transferred to Kolkata in December 2015, and quit the establishment at the end of July 2017. 
• On 13th October, 2018, almost after 1 year and 2 months after she resigned from the establishment, she lodged a complaint against the petitioner alleging that she was subjected to harassment at her workplace and faced severe bullying.  
• After completion of investigation, the investigating agency submitted a charge sheet under section 509 of the IPC instead of the originally alleged section 354.  
• The complainant also filed a complaint with the internal complaints committee of her former employer alleging sexual harassment under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013. Although the complaint before the internal committee was time-barred, the committee proceeded with a detailed enquiry and exonerated the petitioner of all charges levelled against him.  
• The petitioner contended that the FIR was lodged with malicious intent due to professional rivalry and personal grudge.  
• The petitioner argued that the complaint lacked specific details of words, sounds, or gestures that allegedly insulted the complainant's modesty, which are essential ingredients for constituting an offence under section 509 IPC. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The court observed that to constitute an offence under section 509 of the IPC, there must be specific allegation that the action complained of has insulted the modesty of some particular woman, not merely of any class or section of women.  
• The court noted that neither in the FIR nor in the materials collected during investigation, including statements recorded under section 161 of CrPC was there any allegation of making any sound or gesture or exhibiting any object.  
• The court found that some witnesses examined under section 161 of CrPC stated that though the petitioner used to create pressure for more work, they never found him to misbehave with the complainant or other staff.  
• The court held that there appeared to be no material to establish the intention and knowledge of the petitioner to insult the modesty of the complainant, nor any act described to establish that the petitioner intended to shock the sense of decency of the complainant.  
• The court concluded that merely using the words "harassed" or "abused" does not demonstrate the requisite intention or knowledge which can lead to conclusion that any alleged act constitutes an insult to complainant's modesty.  
• The court emphasized that mere harassment at workplace or abuse at workplace per se may not constitute an offence under section 509 of IPC unless essential ingredients are fulfilled.  
• The court also considered that the internal complaints committee had exonerated the petitioner on merits, finding the allegations of sexual harassment unfounded in absence of specific evidence.  
• The court noted that since the standard of proof required in criminal cases is much higher than in departmental proceedings, and the petitioner was already exonerated in the departmental inquiry, continuing the criminal prosecution would amount to abuse of process of court. 

What is Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)? 

• This provision was previously covered under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code before the implementation of the new criminal laws. 
• Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita states that whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any words, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object in any form, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and also with fine. 
• The offence requires specific intention to insult the modesty of a woman through words, sounds, gestures, objects, or intrusion upon privacy, with the essential element being that the accused must have intended that such actions would be perceived by the woman in question.