Kerala High Court cancelled criminal proceedings against Anas Mohammed M., a Motor Vehicle Inspector, accused of verbally insulting a woman during her driving test on 14 October 2022.
The woman claimed that inside the moving car, he commented on her long nails, hygiene, asked sarcastically if he should trim her nails, said she should be taken for a bath before the test, and even called her “daughter of an immoral woman.” The police booked him under Section 294(b) IPC (obscene words in public place) and Section 509 IPC (insult to modesty).
Brief Facts of the Case
- Incident Date: 14 October 2022
- Accused: Anas Mohammed M., Motor Vehicle Inspector
- What Happened: During a woman’s driving test, he commented on her long nails, hygiene, and made some rude remarks — including calling her “daughter of an immoral woman” and questioning her fitness for the job she claimed to have.
- Police Action: FIR registered under Section 294(b) IPC (obscene words in public place) and Section 509 IPC (insulting the modesty of a woman).
- Defence: Even if all allegations are accepted as true, they don’t fit the legal meaning of the offences charged.
Legal Provisions in the Case
- Section 294(b) IPC – Using obscene words/acts in or near a public place.
- Section 509 IPC – Words/gestures intended to insult a woman’s modesty.
Arguments
Accused:
- The conversation happened inside a moving car, not a “public place.”
- Words used were rude but not legally obscene, nor did they have sexual meaning.
- No intent to insult the woman’s modesty in the sense defined by law.
- Supreme Court has ruled that abusive words without sexual intent are not covered under Section 509 IPC.
State:
- The language was filthy and degrading, aimed directly at the woman.
- Such comments are capable of lowering a woman’s dignity and outrage her modesty.
- The matter deserved to go to trial.
Court’s Observations
- A moving car is not a “public place” for Section 294(b) IPC.
- Words used were not obscene in the legal sense — they didn’t appeal to sexual interest or corrupt listeners.
- For Section 509 IPC, “modesty” means something that shocks the sense of decency of a woman and often has a sexual tone. Here, the remarks were offensive but lacked that element.
- This was an angry outburst over nails and appearance, not an act with criminal intent under these sections.
- Followed Supreme Court ruling that mere filthy language without sexual context doesn’t amount to Section 509 offence.
Conclusion of the Judgment
The Court said the basic legal ingredients for both offences were missing, even if the woman’s version was taken as true. It cancelled the case and cleared the accused of all charges.
Comments from the author of this website
I have seen far too many cases where ordinary disputes or rude arguments are blown up into criminal offences. This was one of them. A disagreement over personal appearance during a driving test — nails, hygiene, and some unpleasant remarks — was suddenly painted as “obscenity” and “insult to modesty.”
The problem is not just the complaint. It’s how quickly the police register such cases without checking if the law actually applies. Section 294(b) and Section 509 are meant for serious offences — not for personal grudges or workplace friction. Here, there was no public place, no sexual remarks, and no intent to target the woman’s modesty in the legal sense. Yet, the man was made to face criminal proceedings.
Cases like this cause massive harm. The accused faces public shame, workplace trouble, and emotional stress, even if they are later cleared. Real victims of harassment suffer too, because the misuse of these sections makes people doubt genuine cases. It’s frustrating to see the legal system used as a tool of personal revenge rather than justice.
Final Thoughts
Laws to protect dignity and safety must be applied carefully. When they are misused, they destroy trust in the legal system and drain resources that should go to real cases. This judgment is a reminder for police and lower courts to check the facts and legal definitions before filing charges.
Not every unpleasant argument is a crime. Not every rude word is “obscenity” or “insult to modesty.” Criminal law should be the last resort, not the first weapon in personal disputes.
Read Complete Judgement Here