NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court has said that a girl’s choice of clothing is a matter of personal choice and that suggesting that wearing jeans could “corrupt young boys” reflects a “deeply troubling and unacceptable mindset”.Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha made the observations while convicting a man of sexually harassing a girl in 2013 and overturning his acquittal by a trial court in 2014.The girl had alleged that the accused, her neighbour, stalked her, made sexually coloured remarks and touched her inappropriately. The State had challenged the trial court’s decision to acquit him.The high court took strong exception to the “line of cross-examination and arguments” adopted by the accused’s counsel, particularly questions concerning the girl’s “western” dressing, the religion of people living in the locality and objections raised to her clothing.“What a girl or woman chooses to wear is a matter of her personal choice. Neither her neighbours, nor society, nor the accused, nor counsel appearing in a court of law has any right to dictate her clothing. It is simply none of their concern. The suggestion that a woman wearing jeans may ‘corrupt young boys’ reflects a deeply troubling and unacceptable mindset,” the court said.“The answer does not lie in controlling the clothes of girls and women. Parents and society must instead teach their children to control their conduct, respect personal boundaries and treat every human with dignity, whether at home or outside,” it added.Justice Sudha said the cross-examination in the case was “wholly irrelevant” and “improper” and should have been disallowed by the trial judge at the outset.The court held that a woman’s choice of attire neither diminishes her dignity nor provides any justification for unlawful conduct against her.“Questions based on a woman’s clothing, character, lifestyle, religion or personal choices, unless strictly relevant to an issue arising in the case, must not be permitted,” the court said.The high court further emphasised that “even a woman of easy virtue” was entitled to protect her person, and said the only issue before it was whether an offence had been committed.The religion of residents in the locality and the clothes worn by the girl had no connection with that issue, it said.“PW4 (girl) may be wearing clothes not palatable or approved by the accused or the other residents. That is no ground to disbelieve or discard her testimony. The grounds on which the trial court disbelieved the case are immaterial, and they do not in any way affect the core prosecution case,” the court stated.The court held that the trial court’s acquittal was erroneous and concluded that the material on record clearly established an offence under Section 354A(1)(i) of the IPC.“Therefore, I find the appellant/accused guilty of the commission of the offence punishable under Section 354A (1)(i) IPC and hence convict him thereunder,” the court ordered.However, the high court said the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act could not be invoked as the prosecution had failed to satisfactorily establish that the girl was a minor.(The victim’s identity has not been revealed to protect her privacy as per Supreme court directives on cases related to sexual assault)(With agency inputs)
