Eve Teasing Often Leads To Another Serious Offence; Accused Must Be Given Stringent Punishment: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court has emphasized that eve teasing is extremely common, and often becomes a reason for another serious offence, which is why stringent punishment must be imposed on the accused persons.
In that context, the Bench of Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Shyam C Chandak observed that, "There is need to keep under control such instances of teasing young girls, which are common and often become reason for another offence and sometime to serious one. Therefore, stringent punishment should be imposed on the accused persons for the offence of Section 304 (Part-II)."
Counsel Daulat G Khamkar, along with others, appeared for the appellants, while APP AA Takalkar appeared for the respondent.
The case involved three men convicted by the trial court for killing a man who intervened in eve-teasing. The incident began with Abhijit Sangare's eve-teasing of a young girl, which was reported to her mother and brother. The brother informed their neighbour (the deceased), who warned Sangare. Later, Sangare, accompanied by two men, attacked the deceased with iron rods and a wooden log, resulting in his death. The Trial Court sentenced the three men to life imprisonment. They subsequently appealed the Trial Court's decision in the High Court.
The Court observed that, "Conspectus of the above discussion is that, considering the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances established therefrom, this Court is of the view that, the act of causing death committed by the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention comes within ambit of Section 304 (Part-II) read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. However, it cannot be ignored that, the act of the accused persons took the life of an innocent young man who just wanted to correct the accused no.3 as he teased a young girl."
Subsequently, the High Court reduced the life imprisonment sentence of the accused to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years.
Appearances:
Appellants: Counsels Daulat G Khamkar, Aashay B Topiwala, Vrushabh M Savla
Respondent: APP AA Takalkar
Cause Title: Eknath Laxman Shinde & Anr. vs The State of Maharashtra
Click here to read/download the Judgment
