A woman professor who assaulted a molester in self-defence has been asked to pay a fine of Rs 1,000 by V.J. Kore, metropolitan magistrate at the Mazgaon court. Assaulting a man, to resist and retaliate sexual advances, does not come under self defence, the magistrate ruled while convicting the 34 year old woman of assaulting a 61-year-old neighbour, who molested her in September 2015. Meanwhile, the man was convicted for molestation by the same court on the same day.
Background details of case
As per the prosecution case, on September 15, 2015, a 61 year old man was cleaning the open passage outside his house, and threw the dust over the woman. However, when the woman objected to his act, he allegedly used abusive words and also touched her inappropriately. The woman in retaliation hit the man with her umbrella, breaking his spectacles and hurting him on his face. Both the man and the woman filed the case with Kalachowki police station on the same day.
While the police filed a chargesheet against the man in November 2015 and it filed the chargesheet against the woman in March 2016. Since both the cases involved same incident, the trial of both the case was conducted simultaneously.
The man in his defence claimed that he has been falsely implicated in molestation charges. It was contended that the woman came in front of the accused and assaulted him.
The court however, rejected the theory in the case filed by the man against the woman and observed that, "It is highly disbelivable that without any reason any educated woman would assault any person." The court also accepted the defence taken by the woman that accused molested her therefore she assaulted him.
While holding the man guilty of molestation it observed that woman had admitted that she assaulted accused with an umbrella. The woman is a highly qualified professor and she admitted that she assaulted the man but that was purely in "self-defence" since he caught hold of her hand and sexually molested her.
Court's observations
"In my considered view, no man is permitted even to touch nail of the woman without her consent. Moreover, every woman has sixth sense and she knows when any men touch her body part the intention behind touching her. It is pertinent to note that no woman will come forward with such allegations without there being any substance," the magistrate observed.
The court also refused to grant him benefit of probation and sentenced him for one year imprisonment observing, "nowadays offences against women are day by day increasing. Women are not safe inside the house as well as outside the house." Hence punishment to one accused is a lesson to others who are going to commit similar kind of offences. "The said offence is in respect of modesty of women, hence benefit of probation of offenders Act cannot be granted," the magistrate noted.
At the same time, the court, ironically, held the woman, for assaulting the man. The lawyer for the woman, Prashant Gurav had contended that the woman assaulted the man as he molested her and her act fell in the category of private defence. The court rejected his arguments saying it was an emotional appeal.
"Nobody can take law in one's hands"
While convicting the woman the court said, "No doubt (the) emotional argument is appreciable, but law does not permit (anyone) to take law in one's hand.
"If as per the defence of the accused, one presumed that the (man) molested her then she has the remedy to lodge complaint to the police station...... No one is permitted to take law in one's hand. Therefore, it cannot be said that the act of accused come under private defence."
The court however also accepted that the act was done on the spur of the moment out of anger and showed leniency in awarding punishment. The woman was hence asked only to pay a fine of Rs 1000.
