skip to content
Advertisement
Premium
This is an archive article published on November 6, 2022

F*** off sexually coloured remark, not used in Indian society: Delhi Court in sexual harassment case

In his order passed on October 29, Additional Sessions Judge Sanjay Sharma said the word is American vulgar slang and an offensive word.

The prosecution contended that the word ‘f*** off’ is a sexually coloured remark and must be construed in its ordinary sense. (Representational)The prosecution contended that the word ‘f*** off’ is a sexually coloured remark and must be construed in its ordinary sense. (Representational)

A Delhi court has said the word ‘f*** off’ was a sexually coloured remark and is offensive, while upholding sexual harassment charges against a man accused of using abusive language against a woman in 2019.

In his order passed on October 29, Additional Sessions Judge Sanjay Sharma said the word is American vulgar slang and an offensive word.

“In Indian society, schools or colleges, this word is not used to ask anyone to leave or go away. Moreover, given the facts and circumstances of the incident, it cannot be said that the petitioner was merely intending to ask the complainant to leave or go away. In ordinary sense, the said word is abusive, offensive and humiliating,” the court said.

Story continues below this ad

The lawyer for the accused told the court that his client did not make any sexually coloured remarks and said this word is generally used in society, colleges and universities. He also contented the meaning of the said word is defined in Cambridge Dictionary (UK) as “… To leave or go away, used specially as a rude way of telling someone to go away…” He said the petitioner merely asked the complainant to leave the premises by saying the said word.

The prosecution contended that the word ‘f*** off’ is a sexually coloured remark and must be construed in its ordinary sense. It contended that the “petitioner along with other persons entered into the woman’s house and threatened her and her family to throw them out”. The prosecutor said they also addressed the complainant as ‘bazaru aurat’ and that there was sufficient material to proceed against the petitioner.

In August, a Mahila Court had framed charges against the accused under IPC sections 354A (sexual harassment), 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation).

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement

You May Like

Advertisement