Kerala High Court quashes obscenity case against driving inspector who told lady to take a bath, cut her nails

The Kerala High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against a Motor Vehicle inspector who was accused of making filthy remarks to a woman during her driving test [Anas Mohammed M v State of Kerala].

Justice G Girish observed that although the remarks made by the officer were filthy, they did not amount to the offence of using obscene words in a public place or outraging a woman's modesty, punishable under Sections 294(b) and Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The mere use of filthy language without any contextual framework or accompanying words indicating an intent to insult the modesty of the victim, would not constitute the offence under Section 509, the Court reiterated.

"It is not possible to say that the words allegedly spoken by the petitioner to the de facto complainant were intended to shock the sense of decency of the de facto complainant as a woman. Nor could it be said that the alleged act of the petitioner was having a sexual colour. At the most, it could be said that the petitioner had used filthy language upon the de facto complainant, enraged by the act of the de facto complainant who came for the driving test without trimming her nails," the Court held, while allowing the driving inspector's plea to quash the case against him.

The case arose from an incident that occurred in October 2022, when a woman appeared for a driving test conducted by the accused Motor Vehicle inspector, Anas Mohammed M.

During the test, while both were inside the vehicle, the officer allegedly verbally abused her and scolded her for not trimming her nails.

He allegedly told her that his body would become septic due to her long nails and asked if he should cut them himself. He also allegedly went on to comment that women who do not brush, bathe, or trim their nails were the offspring of immoral ladies and further insulted her by calling her the 'daughter of an immoral lady.'

The woman filed a complaint, and the police registered a case against the driving inspector under Sections 294(b) and 509 of the IPC.

After charges were filed, the accused officer approached the magistrate court seeking discharge, which was denied, prompting him to approach the High Court with a revision plea.

The Court observed that the alleged incident took place inside a moving vehicle and thus did not fall within the meaning of 'public place' under Section 294(b) IPC.

It further clarified that the words used by the officer, while filthy, could not be categorised as 'obscene', as obscenity required words to appeal to a person's sexual interest or have the tendency to corrupt or deprave those who hear it.

As for Section 509 IPC (offence of outraging a woman's modesty), the Court explained that the test was whether the words were intended to shock a woman's sense of decency and carried sexual undertones.

In the present case, it found that the officer's comments, though distasteful were not sexually coloured and appeared to have been made out of anger or frustration.

The Court, therefore, quashed the criminal case against the accused driving inspector.

The petitioner (driving inspector) was represented by advocates A Rajasimhan and Vyakhari KU.

Senior public prosecutor Pushpalatha MK appeared for the State.

[Read Order]