Charges framed against Brij Bhushan: What does this mean?

The Rouse Avenue court that framed charges under IPC Sections 354 and 354A, noted that it has found sufficient material to frame charges for the offence of criminal intimidation in the allegations of two of the complainants.

The framing of charges means the trial judge has found a prima facie case against the accused, based on the material in the chargesheet. This is not a determination of whether the accused has committed the alleged offences — it is only an acknowledgment that sufficient grounds exist to proceed with the trial.

After the trial judge frames the charges, the accused can plead innocent or guilty. If the accused pleads innocent, the next step is the summoning of witnesses for cross-examination by the defence lawyer(s). After witnesses are examined, both sides present their arguments. Upon completion of arguments, the judge may reserve judgment. If the judge decides to convict the accused, the court will also pronounce the sentence.

Sections of IPC Sections 354 and 354A, along with Sections 354 B-D are often classified as “offences against women”.

Section 354 states that whoever assaults or uses criminal force against a woman “intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty” shall be punished with a term of imprisonment between 1 and 5 years and/or a fine.

The phrase “outrage her modesty” is not defined in the IPC. However, the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Major Singh (1996) held that “…the essence of a woman’s modesty is her sex. The modesty of an adult female is writ large on her body. Young or old, intelligent or imbecile, awake or sleeping, the woman possesses a modesty capable of being outraged.”

Section 354A deals with sexual harassment, which is defined by any of four acts. First, “physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures”; second, “a demand or request for sexual favours”; third, “showing pornography against the will of a woman”; and fourth, “making sexually coloured remarks”.

The first, second, and third acts are treated more severely, and carry a punishment of up to 3 years in prison and a fine. The fourth act can be punished with a term of up to 1 year and a fine.

The trial judge has also seen fit to frame charges of criminal intimidation against Brij Bhushan, which is defined in Section 503 of the IPC. It states that anyone who threatens another person with an “injury to his person, reputation or property” with the intention to “cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do”, is guilty of criminal intimidation.

Section 506 lays down the punishment for criminal intimidation: up to 2 years’ imprisonment, which can extend to 7 years if the person threatens to cause death, grievous hurt, destruction of property by fire, “impute unchastity to a woman”, or commit an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment, or up to 7 years’ imprisonment.