New Delhi, Jan 21 (PTI) No one can touch a woman without her consent, a Delhi court said and termed it unfortunate that women continue to be victimised by “lecherous and sexually- pervert” men.
The court’s observation came while awarding five years jail term to Ram for sexually assaulting a nine-year-old girl.
Additional Sessions Judge Seema Maini awarded rigorous imprisonment to Uttar Pradesh resident Chavi Ram, who had inappropriately touched the minor at a crowded market in north Delhi’s Mukherjee Nagar in 2014.
The court said a woman’s body is her own and it is she who has an exclusive right over it and all others are prohibited to touch her body, without her consent, for any purpose whatsoever.
It also said that right to privacy of women does not seem to be recognised by men and they do not think twice, before making untoward advances or satisfying their lust by sexually assaulting helpless girls.
“Such perverts, get a sexual kick by assaulting the women, oblivious to the rights of privacy of the female gender including a female child,” it said.
The court said that Ram being a “sexual pervert” deserves no leniency and imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on him out of which Rs 5,000 would be given to the girl.
Apart from that the court asked the Delhi State Legal Service Authority to pay Rs 50,000 to the child.
“In a free, fast progressing, technically-strong country like India, it is an unfortunate scenario that the female citizens, be it an adult or a small child, continue to be consistently victimised by lecherous and sexually pervert male folk, found in abundance in public places, especially crowded markets, public transports like buses and Metros and recreation joints like movie halls and theatres,” the court said.
According to the complaint, on September 25, 2014, while the girl was with her mother at the market near Mukherjee Nagar here, Ram inappropriately touched the child and tried to molest her.
The minor immediately informed her mother and pointed to Ram after which he started running from the spot. He was caught by the mother with the help of passersby.
The man claimed he was falsely implicated in the case as the market was crowded and it was a case of misconception.
He claimed that the real offender ran away after committing the crime.
The court, however, rejected Ram’s claim and said it was clear that he was with a sexual intent, taking advantage of a crowded market place, wilfully touching the girl and thereafter trying to run away.
