SHAFI Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the accused No.2 among the two accused in the instant Crime No.881/2019 of Kottiyam Police Station which has been registered for the offences punishable under Secs. 294(b), 354, 376, 506 and 417 of the IPC. The crime has been registered on the basis of the FI statement given by the lady defacto complainant on 07.12.2019 at about 5.00 p.m. in respect of the alleged incident which happened for the period from 14.11.19 to 16.11.2019.

(2.) The brief of the prosecution case is that A1 herein is the father of the petitioner herein (A2), aged 29 years born in former's wedlock with his first wife. That later A1 had solemnized his marriage (Nikah) with the lady defacto complainant aged 46 years on 14.11.2019 and had taken her to his house and they had sexual relationship and later, A1 had taken her to Greenland lodge on 16.11.2019, where according to her, she was subjected to sexual intercourse by A1 without her consent and on coming to know A1 had conducted his marriage with the lady defacto complainant, A2 had come near her on 14.11.2019 and abused her using filthy and obscene words, by calling her a prostitute and that she is going after many men etc and had caught hold of her and had 'attempted to commit rape' on her etc. and that later, A1 had breached his promise and deserted her.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the abovesaid allegations are false and baseless and further that even going by the prosecution case, the only allegation raised against him is that he had used filthy and abusive words to the lady defacto complainant and allegations that he had caught hold of her and attempted to rape her are all absolutely false and coloured versions given only to add strength to her false case. Further that, it is by now well settled by a series of rulings as in Latheef v. State of Kerala [2014 (2) KLT 987], P.T. Chacko v. Nainan Chacko 1967 KLT 799, Sangeetha Lakshmana v. State of Kerala [2008 (2) KLT 745] that mere use of foul languages however vulgar it may be will not constitute the offence of use of obscene words as per Sec.294(b) of the IPC and that the said offence would lie and only if the complainant has a definite case that the alleged words used are lascivious which have the effect of arousing impure and defiling sexual thoughts in the minds of the hearers and further that the complainant should say precisely as to what exactly are the obscene words that are allegedly used etc. That in the instant case, the only allegation is that the petitioner had used vulgar, foul and abusive words which will not constitute the offence as per Sec.294(b) of the IPC. Further that, even in the FIR, no offence as per Sec.511 of 376 of the IPC (attempt to commit rape) has been alleged against the petitioner. Further that, the abovesaid allegations will not even remotely qualify to fulfill any of the ingredients of the serious offence of attempt to commit rape (Sec.511 of 376 of the IPC).