Offence Of Outraging Modesty Of A Woman In Public Is A Serious Offence Regardless Of Punishment Term, Can't Quash FIR On Compromise: P&H High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the offence of outraging modesty of a woman in a public place cannot be compromised and would fall in the category of a serious offence "notwithstanding the fact that the punishment provided under Section 354 of the IPC is imprisonment for a term of not less than one year but which may extend to five years."

Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri said, "in cases of such like nature of the present case where as per the allegations, in a public place in a Dussehra program, a group of 8-10 young men including the present three petitioners allegedly tried to outrage the modesty of respondent No.2-complainant, who was accompanied by her husband and on being objected to by her husband, he was hit on the head with a metal bracelet (kara) by the petitioners and he started bleeding as per the learned State counsel, the aforesaid act cannot be termed as an offence which relates to a private offence."

The Court further said that, "it is an offence which affects the public at large and particularly in view of the fact that the aforesaid incident took place at a public place where Dussehra program was going on."

The Court was hearing a petition under Section 528 of the BNSS for quashing of FIR No.225 dated 25.10.2023, under Sections 354 and 323 of the IPC, on the basis of compromise.

According to the complaint, 8-10 boys, including petitioners, outraged the modesty of a woman at a Dussehra program and her husband was hit by the accused while saving her.

Counsel for the petitioners submitted that after the aforesaid FIR was registered, the matter was investigated by the police and challan has been presented before the competent Court and charges have been framed in the present case but in the meantime, a compromise has been effected between the parties.

He further added that, the petitioners are young boys of the age of 21 years, 25 years and 25 years, respectively and as per the allegations, they alongwith other boys were at a Dussehra mela where they allegedly tried to outrage the modesty of the complainant, who was with her husband and thereafter, caused injury on the head of the husband of the complainant.

After hearing the submissions, the Court said that there is no doubt that an FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise but it is not a matter of right and each and every case has to be seen in light of its own facts and circumstances.

"Where the offence is more or less in the nature of a private offence such like in the matrimonial cases, commercial disputes, money matters and some other offences of lighter nature, which does not affect public interest at large, then certainly given the facts and circumstances of each and every case, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise," the Court said.

It added that, still, there is no right vested in the accused for getting the quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise and the Court has to consider each and every case in a very cautious and diligent manner. 

Considering the seriousness of the offence, the Court stated that it falls in the category of serious offence notwithstanding the fact that the punishment provided under Section 354 of the IPC is imprisonment for a term of not less than one year but which may extend to five years, along with a fine.

In the light of the above, the plea was dismissed.

Mr. Pranshul Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners.

Title: XXX v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [CRM-M-25919-2025]