Mumbai, Dec 05: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has held that posting objectionable content about a woman on social media to defame or harass her can attract serious charges of assault or criminal force to outrage modesty and stalking under the provision of the Indian Penal Code.
Quashing Plea Dismissed
A bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Justice Nandesh Deshpande, on Tuesday, dismissed an application filed by a man seeking to quash an FIR and the ensuing criminal proceedings.
Background of the Case
The case was filed by a married woman who alleged that she had met the applicant two years before her 2019 marriage. He had proposed to her, but she refused. She claimed that after her refusal, the applicant became hostile and posted objectionable, defamatory content about her on Facebook on multiple occasions in 2019.
Threat Before Marriage, Continued Harassment Alleged
She further alleged that the day before her wedding, the applicant arrived at her residence carrying a bottle of poison and threatened to commit suicide. According to her, he continued stalking her by uploading defamatory posts and attempting to disrupt her marital life.
Applicant’s Defence
The man, however, contended that their friendship had evolved into a romantic relationship since 2014–15 and that both families had initially agreed to their marriage. He alleged that the woman’s family later began demanding money, and that he had given them Rs 2.88 lakh in good faith. When he sought repayment, he claimed he was abused and the marriage was called off.
Counter-Complaint Filed by Applicant
He also pointed out that he had filed a private complaint for cheating and intimidation, which is pending before a magistrate in Baramati. The present FIR, he argued, was a retaliatory measure.
State Objects to Quashing Request
The state opposed the plea, submitting that the FIR disclosed a prima facie case.
Sections 354 & 354-D Applicable: Court
The HC noted that the allegations clearly attracted Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to outrage modesty) and 354-D (stalking) IPC. Observing that social media cannot be used as a tool for harassment, the bench said: “…posting of a post on a social site i.e. Facebook, would amount to committing an offence as contemplated under the above sections.”
Past Affairs Don’t Grant ‘License’ to Defame
The judges stressed that neither a past relationship nor financial transactions grant a man the “license” to defame a woman online.
Money Dispute No Justification for Harassment
The bench added: “Assuming that the applicant had lent money to her on assurance of marriage, that cannot be construed as giving a license… to post some objectionable post over the social site.”
Also Watch:
Matter Must Go to Trial
Holding that disputed facts — including the alleged financial dispute — must be examined during trial, the court ruled that its powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to stifle a legitimate prosecution.
Plea Rejected Due to Evidence on Record
Finding “overwhelming material” against the applicant at this stage, the court rejected the quashing plea.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
