4 min readSuratUpdated: Jul 20, 2026 10:47 PM IST
The Surat District and Sessions Court recently upheld the six-month prison sentence awarded to a youth for making sexually coloured remarks at a woman while she was returning home from a tuition class. Rejecting the convict’s appeal against a lower court’s order, the Sessions Court noted that a strict stance must be adopted in crimes against women to serve as a deterrent in society.
The case dates back to October 10, 2015, when the woman, then 21, was riding her moped alone through Surat. While waiting at a traffic junction, the accused, Mahir Shaikh, accompanied by his friend Adil Shaikh, allegedly targeted her by uttering a sexually colored phrase.
The woman informed her mother, and the police filed an FIR on October 13, 2015, under charges of sexual harassment, criminal intimidation, and 427 mischief causing property damage.
Conviction and appeal
Following a trial, a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) court convicted Shaikh on December 31, 2024, sentencing him to six months in jail based on eyewitness and victim testimonies. His associate, Adil Shaikh, was acquitted due to a lack of evidence.
Shaikh challenged the conviction in the 12th Additional Sessions Court before Judge Bhavesh Avashiya, claiming the case was fabricated.
Defence counsel N M Shaikh argued that the lower court’s ruling violated judicial principles and alleged that the complaint was an act of personal vengeance. The defence stated that the victim’s family shared a long-standing neighbourhood dispute with Shaikh’s father, which included a separate 2012 police case, and accused the mother of using her daughter to settle old scores.
Countering the defence, Additional Public Prosecutor D V Dave and advocate Ilyas Patel argued that the accused was a habitual harasser who frequently whistled and made objectionable comments at the victim. The prosecution emphasised that a young woman would not file a false, highly stigmatising complaint simply to leverage a parental dispute.
Story continues below this ad
No leniency for harassment
Upholding the conviction, Judge Bhavesh Avashiya firmly rejected the defence’s claim of a family vendetta. The court observed that prior friction between the families did not invalidate the reality of the harassment.
“The earlier criminal cases against the accused father with the mother of the victim also came on record. Based on the earlier criminal cases, the present complaint should not be considered false or fake. The victim girl cannot file a fake complaint to take revenge of his mother. In the present complaint, the complainant/victim accusation on the accused is genuine and the defence lawyer has not brought any concrete evidence against it and also their arguments were not satisfactory,” the Sessions Court noted.
“The fact that Mahir Shaikh has been repeatedly harassing the complainant in this way has been revealed from the evidence of the complainant. Moreover, the old enmity between the two families has persisted for this reason. Considering all these facts, the court should adopt a stricter stance in crimes against women, and this court is of the opinion that the benefit of probation cannot be given to the accused in such crimes,” it added.
“Moreover, Mahir Shaikh and the complainant have been living in the same area, so if the accused is released with a lesser sentence, he will be encouraged to commit this type of crime again or a more serious one. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the sentence and fine awarded by the trial court.”
Story continues below this ad
Concluding that the lower court’s original order was reasoned, the Sessions Court dismissed the appeal. While the prosecution expressed deep satisfaction with the verdict, the defence stated they will review the certified copy of the judgment before deciding on an appeal to the High Court.
