Repeat behaviour needed to prove stalking under IPC: Nagpur bench of Bombay HC

NAGPUR: Stalking can be established as an offence under Section 354-D(1) of the IPC only if the suspect repeats such behaviour, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court said while quashing this specific charge in the conviction of a man from Maharashtra's Chandrapur district.

While 29-year-old Mahadev Bhusari was spared punishment for stalking, the bench upheld his conviction for w rongful restraint and sexual harassment under the Pocso Act along with the two-year jail term handed to him by a lower court.

“Perusal of sub-clause (i) of Section 354-D (1) clearly indicates that the acts mentioned therein must be done repeatedly, despite a clear indication of disinterest by a woman. This basic ingredient has not been established in this case,” Justice GovindaSanap sa id while setting aside his conviction for stalking.

Bhusari had allegedly propositioned a minor in Marathi and tried to hold her hand. On hearing her screaming, farmers working nearby rushed to he r rescue. Based on the testimony of eight witnesses, including the survivor’s friends, a court at Warora in Chandrapur convicted and sentenced Bhusari, which he challenged in the high court.

Justice Sanap s aid thesurvivor didn’t “categorically” depose about the petitioner repeatedly stalking her and a friend, only mentioning that he used to whistle and sing songs. “This is the only sta tement to attribute an allegation of stalking to the appellant. The evidence of the girl and her friend is too vague and falls short to prove the basic ingredients of Section 354-D (1). There is no specific statement to this effect in the report lodged by the victim. ”