MR. THOMAS JADAN vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
R
ST
DATED THIS THE 21 DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 34898 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MR. THOMAS JADAN,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
S/O MR. GABRIEL PALDANO,
CURRENTLY RESIDING AT NO.21,
TRINITY ONE APARTMENTS,
CHURCH ROAD,
SHANTINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 027.
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. NIDHISHREE B.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
RD
38H, 3 STREET,
SHANTALA NAGAR,
ASHOK NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 025.
2. MS. PURVA K,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
D/O MR. MANISH KHARBIKER,
RESIDING AT NO.1,
OFFICERS RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS,
Digitally signed
by PADMAVATHI
B K
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
ND
MADIWALA ROAD, 2 BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU - 560 034.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP FOR R1;
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 528 OF BNS
PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.0363/2024 (ANNX-
A) REGISTERED BY THE R-1 AGAINST THE PETITIONER DATED
29.11.2024 FILED BY THE R-2 UNDER SECTIONS 77, 78 AND
79 OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 AND SECTIONS
66E AND 67D OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000
PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE XXIX ADD. CMM COURT,
MAYO HALL, BENGALURU AND ALL PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT
THERETO AND GRANT SUCH AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS
HONBLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE
AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner, a student is before the Court calling in
question registration of a crime in Crime No.363/2024 for
offences punishable under Sections 77, 78 and 79 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ( for short 'BNS, 2023') and Sections 66E
and 67D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
2. Heard Smt. Nidhishree B V, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. Waheed M M, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.1.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, brief facts, are as
follows:
The petitioner and respondent No.2, aged 21 and 20
years respectively, were not strangers to each other. They
were classmates and, by all accounts, friends as well. The
genesis of the controversy lies in a solitary exchange over
Instagram. The petitioner, perhaps carried away by youthful
exuberance and the informality that characterizes
conversations in the digital age, sent a direct message to
respondent No.2 complimenting her appearance on a particular
day. The compliment, however, was couched in what is now
popularly described as “Gen-Z lingo”.
4. The message, innocuous according to the petitioner, is
said to have been shown to the father of respondent No.2, who,
it is submitted, is an Officer of the Indian Police Service in the
State. What began as a fleeting digital compliment between
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
two young classmates soon snowballed into a criminal
prosecution. A crime came to be registered, drawing the
petitioner into the labyrinth of criminal law and placing his
academic and professional future under a cloud of uncertainty.
5. The petitioner is stated to be a State-level cricketer
and was, at the relevant point in time, preparing to represent
an Under-19 team in Tamil Nadu. In the course of
investigation, his laptop and mobile phone are alleged said to
have been seized. Learned counsel for the petitioner would
contend that the seizure was wholly contrary to law and bereft
of statutory sanction. Be that as it may, confronted with the
spectre of a criminal investigation arising out of a solitary
message, the petitioner knocked at the doors of this Court. This
Court, on consideration of the matter, stayed further
investigation insofar as the petitioner was concerned.
6. The complainant-respondent No.2 though served 2
years ago, has remained unrepresented even today. Therefore,
the petitioner and respondent No.1 - State are heard.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner takes
this Court through the documents appended to the petition or
the direct message that was sent to the complainant. The
learned counsel submits that this would not even attract any of
the ingredients of the offences as obtaining under Sections 77,
78 and 79 of the BNS, 2023. It was two classmates, two
friends chatting, describing how the complainant was beautiful.
The learned counsel would further submit that if investigation is
permitted, it would become an abuse of the process of the law
and jeopardise the career of the student - the petitioner.
8. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing
for the State would however, put up vehement opposition to
any order that would be passed by the Court quashing the
investigation itself, contending that be it the classmate or
friend, he has no right to speak on how beautiful the
complainant looks on a particular day. So, would seek
investigation into the matter and dismissal of the petition.
9. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
the learned High Court Government Pleader and have perused
the material on record.
10. The entire edifice of the crime rests upon a
solitary private communication. It was not a message
circulated in the public domain, nor was it published or
broadcasted to humiliate respondent No.2. It was a
direct communication between two individuals — the
petitioner and the complainant. The message reads:
“U kinda look so hot in light coloured clothes.”
The message merely sought to describe how respondent
No.2 appeared in light-coloured clothes. The expression
employed is undoubtedly colloquial and belongs to the
idiom of contemporary youth. The young increasingly
communicate in abbreviations, informal phrases and
expressions peculiar to the digital age, often without
pausing to contemplate that a casual word, typed in a
fleeting moment, may one day drag them into the
unforgiving web of criminal proceedings.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
11. Significantly, there is no series of messages, no
repetition, no threat, no pursuit, no demand and no further
communication of an objectionable nature. The prosecution
rests on this solitary sentence and nothing beyond it.
12. This lone message has become the proverbial fly
in the ointment and the foundation for invocation of Sections
77, 78 and 79 of the BNS, 2023, relating respectively to
voyeurism, stalking and words, gestures or acts intended to
insult the modesty of a woman. The said sections read as
follows:
“ 77. Voyeurism .— Whoever watches, or
captures the image of a woman engaging in a
private act in circumstances where she would
usually have the expectation of not being observed
either by the perpetrator or by any other person at
the behest of the perpetrator or disseminates such
image shall be punished on first conviction with
imprisonment of either description for a term which shall
not be less than one year, but which may extend to three
years, and shall also be liable to fine, and be punished on
a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of
either description for a term which shall not be less than
three years, but which may extend to seven years, and
shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this
section, “private act” includes an act of watching
carried out in a place which, in the circumstances,
would reasonably be expected to provide privacy
and where the victim's genitals, posterior or breasts
are exposed or covered only in underwear; or the
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
victim is using a lavatory; or the victim is doing a
sexual act that is not of a kind ordinarily done in
public.
Explanation 2.—Where the victim consents to the
capture of the images or any act, but not to their
dissemination to third persons and where such image or
act is disseminated, such dissemination shall be
considered an offence under this section.
78. Stalking.—(1) Any man who—
( i ) follows a woman and contacts, or attempts
to contact such woman to foster personal
interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of
disinterest by such woman; or
( ii ) monitors the use by a woman of the
internet, e-mail or any other form of electronic
communication,
commits the offence of stalking:
Provided that such conduct shall not amount to
stalking if the man who pursued it proves that—
( i ) it was pursued for the purpose of preventing
or detecting crime and the man accused of stalking
had been entrusted with the responsibility of
prevention and detection of crime by the State; or
( ii ) it was pursued under any law or to comply
with any condition or requirement imposed by any
person under any law; or
( iii ) in the particular circumstances such conduct
was reasonable and justified.
(2) Whoever commits the offence of stalking shall
be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to three
years, and shall also be liable to fine; and be punished on
a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to five
years, and shall also be liable to fine.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
79. Word, gesture or act intended to insult
modesty of a woman .— Whoever, intending to insult
the modesty of any woman, utters any words,
makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object
in any form, intending that such word or sound shall
be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be
seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy
of such woman, shall be punished with simple
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
years, and also with fine.”
(Emphasis supplied)
Section 77 of the BNS deals with the offence of
voyeurism. Voyeurism has certain ingredients. Any man who
watches or captures the image of a woman engaging in a
private act would be committing the offence of voyeurism.
Explanation (1) would define a private act to be including an
act of watching carried out in a place which would reasonably
be expected to provide privacy. Section 78 of the BNS defines
stalking to be an act where any man follows a woman and
contacts or attempts to contact a woman to foster personal
interaction repeatedly, despite a clear indication of disinterest
by the woman. Stalking would also include monitoring of the
use of the internet, email or any other form of electronic
communication by a woman. Section 79 of the BNS deals with
the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman and would
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
punish the person who utters any words, makes any sound or
any gesture or exhibits any object in any form, with an intent
to outrage the modesty of a woman.
13. Criminal statutes, particularly those carrying
serious consequences, cannot be set in motion merely
because an expression is inelegant, immature or
distasteful. Every impropriety is not criminality; every
indiscretion cannot be elevated into an offence; and
every awkward expression of admiration cannot be
forced into the statutory mould of voyeurism, stalking or
insult the modesty of a woman .
14. If a solitary private message of the nature quoted
hereinabove were permitted to attract all these offences, the
invocation of criminal law would become an abuse of the
process of law. There is no allegation of the petitioner
having watched, captured or disseminated any private
act so as to constitute voyeurism. There is no allegation
of repeated following, monitoring or persistent
communication, despite disinterest so as to constitute
stalking. Nor does the message, viewed in its setting
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
and in the backdrop of the relationship between the
parties, disclose the deliberate intention necessary to
attract the offence of insulting the modesty of a woman.
15. The expression used, may be inappropriate,
indiscreet and best avoided. Youthful vocabulary,
however, cannot by itself become the gateway to
criminal prosecution , unless the essential ingredients of the
alleged offence are demonstrably present. The criminal law
cannot be employed as a bludgeon to punish every social
indiscretion or linguistic impropriety . It must remain
reserved for conduct that squarely falls within the four corners
of the penal provision.
16. Permitting the investigation to continue in the
peculiar facts of the case would not merely imperil the
career of a young student and sportsperson; it would
permit the process of criminal law itself to become the
punishment. Such continuation would amount to an
abuse of the process of law and inevitably result in
miscarriage of justice.
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:37991
WP No. 34898 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010727662024
17. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
i) Writ petition is allowed.
ii) The FIR registered by the first respondent in Crime
No.363/2024, pending on the file of the XXIX
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Mayo Hall,
Bengaluru and all proceedings taken thereto, qua the
petitioner are hereby quashed.
iii) In the light of the quashment of the proceedings,
I.A.No.1/2025 stands allowed. The concerned
Investigating Officer shall, forthwith, return all the
items of the petitioner that are seized and if kept in
the custody.
Ordered accordingly.
I.A.No.1/2024 stands disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
BSV
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11