Insulting Woman By Calling Her ‘Gandi Aurat’ Can’t Be Treated As Outraging Her Modesty: Delhi HC

Jahanvi Agarwal

According to the Delhi High Court, calling a lady “Gandi Aurat” or acting rudely towards her does not constitute an offense that offends her modesty.

The bench consisted of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who opined that the simple fact that the law is intended to address certain gender-related issues should not be seen as being inherently biased towards the other gender or being anti-men.

 The Court stated that:

“It is crucial to recognise that gender-specific laws are not meant to be “anti-opposite gender” but rather serve the purpose of addressing unique issues faced by a particular gender.”

The Court explained that they cannot waive the rule that there must be enough “material on record” at the time the charge is being framed, notwithstanding the presence of gender-specific laws.

On August 28, 2023, the bench overturned a trial court judgement to charge Varun Bhatia, a Senior Executive of a private bank, with outraging a woman’s modesty in response to a FIR filed by a junior employee for calling her “Gandi Aurat”.

The court ruled that although the phrase is undiplomatic and disrespectful, it does not meet the standard of words used with criminal intent that would normally startle a lady and fall under the purview of Section 509 of the IPC’s definition of a criminal offence.

The complainant and the defendants were acting in their respective capacities as employees and senior officers, the court added.

There were complaints made against the woman, claiming that she was failing to carry out all of her obligations, including attending meetings and reporting to work on time. However, the bench stated that the petitioner should have exercised caution while using strong words towards the complainant and should have been more polite, even when they were at odds.

The bench was of the opinion that:

“While reading the word ‘Gandi Aurat’ in background of overall circumstances of the case, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner’s actions, when evaluated objectively, did not exhibit the level of intent or knowledge necessary to reasonably anticipate that they would provoke such a strong and adverse emotional reaction as to qualify as an outrage to a woman’s modesty.”