Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court’s Nagpur bench has clarified that a single instance of following a girl does not constitute the offence of stalking under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

A Single judge bench of Justice G.A. Sanap, made the observation, while acquitting two men, convicted by the trial court, for stalking a minor girl. The High Court, however, partially upheld the conviction of one for sexual assault.

Emphasising the necessity for repeated or persistent behaviour to substantiate the offence of stalking, the court noted, “in order to attract the offence of stalking, the prosecution must prove that the accused repeatedly or constantly followed, watched or contacted a child either directly or through electronic, digital media. In view of this mandatory requirement of the offence of stalking, a solitary instance of following the victim would not be sufficient to make out this offence.”

The case arose from an incident that occurred on August 26, 2020. On that day, the victim’s mother had gone to purchase clothes for her daughter’s birthday. During her absence, the first accused forcibly entered their house, gagged the victim, and assaulted her. The victim raised an alarm, prompting her sister, who was in another room, to come out. Upon seeing her sister, the first accused fled the scene, but not before issuing threats of dire consequences if the incident was disclosed to anyone. The victim informed her mother, who approached the accused's parents, seeking their intervention. The accused’s parents, however, expressed helplessness, prompting the informant to file a police report on September 4, 2020. The investigation confirmed the victim was a minor, leading to charges under the POCSO Act.

The High Court after carefully examining the testimonies and evidence against each accused, found that the victim's testimony attributed no direct role to the second accused other than accompanying the first accused when he followed her. The court observed: “It has come on record that when accused no.1 committed the offence inside the house of the victim, accused no.2 was standing outside. The victim girl has not attributed any role at that time to accused no.2. Similarly, no specific allegation has been made with regard to the stalking against accused no.2. It is seen that the accused no.2 was roped in because he is the friend of accused no.1. Perusal of the evidence would show that it is not sufficient to prove the charge against accused no.2.”

With regards the first accused, while the court acquitted him of stalking, it upheld his conviction for sexual assault based on the corroborative testimonies of the victim and her sister. The court concluded that it had no reason to discard and disbelieve the evidence of the victim, finding it ‘credible and trustworthy’.

 

Cause Title: Amit Chavan vs State of Maharashtra [CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 364 OF 2022]