Stalking
 |
"Stalking is a crime that can paralyze an otherwise productive person with fear."
- Lisa Madigan
Does anyone have any idea that how many people are stalked
by in their neighborhood, outside
workplaces, schools, colleges etc., whether you are a student, housewife, professional- It simply does not matter.
Section 354D of IPC
defines “stalking”. Any man who 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 monitors the use by a woman of the internet, email or any other form of
electronic communication commits the offence of stalking.
The section was
added by Criminal Amendment Act (2013) post Delhi gang-rape case. This
section takes into account both, the physical stalking and cyberstalking. Many women and men
in India get stalked daily. In easy language,this
section means harassing someone by following the person around or trying to
force any kind of contact by unwanted phone calls, derogatory text messages and
emails that disturb the peace of mind of a person or hacking email accounts or
conducting any other mode of spying. Whoever monitors the use by a person of
the Internet, email or any other form of electronic communication that results
in a fear of violence, or interference with the mental peace of such person,
commits the offence of stalking. Any sort of misuse of electronic communication
to harass someone and hacking into someone’s email account would be a criminal
offence as well. Stalking is a criminal offence.
Hence,even after clear
indication of disinterest of women, if she is followed by a man either in
person or through the electronic medium ( your
mobile phone, computer, internet on Facebook and other social networking
sites,closed-circuit TV (CCTV) cameras and Global Positioning System (GPS)
devices) then he is guilty of the offence of stalking . A stalker can be
someone you know, a past boyfriend or girlfriend or a stranger. it is not correct, and you have every right to seek help and
support to stay safe and be free of harassment.
According to the survey, in 2018 India
reported a stalking case in every 55 min.The number of stalking cases reported has been
increasing.6,266 in 2015, 7,190 in 2016
and 8,145 in 2017. The crime rate reported per 100,000 women has also seen a rise. It increased from 0.8
in 2014 to 1.5 in 2018.This means that the law
is not gender neutral and the recourse is only for the woman.
Understanding the offence
of Stalking
The crime of stalking is not a
standalone crime and is of a nature where many other offences in the law are
interlinked. A woman who is stalked, is not only being mentally harassed, she
may be sexually harassed, eve teased and her modesty may also be outraged. In 2016, the Bombay High Court in Shri Deu Baju Bodake v
The State of Maharashtra, looked into a case of suicide by a
woman who claimed that the reason for her suicide was the constant harassment
and stalking done by the accused. The accused would always stalk her during
work and insist upon getting married to her. The High Court held that the
charges under Section 354D ought to
have been recorded in addition to the charge for abetment to suicide. This
points to the state of investigation of cases by the Police, where lack of
understanding of the law prevents successful prosecution at the future stage,
where evidence may exist. Perhaps Bollywood has a role to play here, making
stalking seem as harmless fun which, in the film Raanjhanaa, eventually
developed into love between the stalker and the victim. This toxic culture now
pervades our society and inevitably affects our perception of the offence
itself. The judgment of the Orissa High Court in Kalandi Charan
Lenka Vs. State of Orissa (2017). In this case, the accused had proposed to
marry the victim and when the marriage could not be finalized, he had
transmitted obscene letters and scandalous mail and even published pamphlets
denigrating the character of the victim. Through the obscene and vulgar mails and
creation of the fake Facebook Account in the name of the victim girl, the
accused exhibited his intention to intimidate her with the purpose of
exploiting her sexually. Even when the girl had changed her place of study
because of the sexual harassment, the accused had followed her, only to harass
her, both online and offline.The Cyber
Cell of the Crime Branch had investigated the same and the High Court held that
the accused was prima facie liable for offences
under Section 354A, for sexual harassment, 354D for online stalking under the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 66-C for identity theft, Section 66-D for
Impersonation and Section 67 and 67 for transmitting obscene and sexually
explicit material online. So far however, successful prosecutions under the
provisions have not been seen in appellate forums. The beginning of a
successful prosecution is by first framing charges under the relevant sections.
A leading case, Priya Matoo young law
student, her stalker Santosh Singh, the son of a former IPS officer, raped her
and murdered her in her Vasant Kunj home. Mattoo pleaded with police, but
nothing happened. Multiple complaints lodged with Vasant Kunj and RK Puram
police in February and August 1995 forced Singh to give "police undertakings
but they were not disincentive. Mattoo was alone at home on January 23, 1996,
when she was raped by Singh and then killed. Afterwards the case was
transferred to CBI in 1996. The trial court convicted Singh in December 1999,
giving him the benefit of doubt. The high court ruled and awarded him the death
penalty. He was later granted life imprisonment by Supreme Court in December
2010. And another and most important
Landmark judgment Vishaka v State of Rajasthan(1997) discussing sexual
harassment at workplace.In Bhubaneswar
Case, the Xavier Institute of management lodged a cybercrime complaint
with the police in December 2004 that students & staffs of this institution
are getting numerous obscene electronic mails. The students were also afraid of
the online hacking, spamming & threatening. Police appointed technical
experts to investigate & examine the matter. At first these were considered
to be spam but later on students were over flooded with obscene mails &
continuous sexual harassment through internet. At that time Bhubaneswar Police
were weak to fight against cybercrimes as they were not trained enough to
tackle the issue. In case Raju Iyer
v. Jawahar Lal Nehru University, the respondent was found guilty
of sexual harassment of the petitioner and have consequently imposed the
penalty of compulsory retirement. He had sent 2 emails on 11.4.2008 and
12.4.2008 which carried vulgar and filthy contents & were graphic in nature
which explicitly ask for oral sexual favours. He also made unnecessary phone
calls at untimely hours to harass her in derogatory languages. The disciplinary
committee of the university imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement
against which the respondent filed an appeal in the High Court of Delhi. But
the court upheld the disciplinary actions of the university and dismissed his
petition.
Conclusion
The 2013 amendment which resulted in Section 354 D of
IPC, does not address all aspects of cyber stalking. There is no attempt on the
part of the legislation to define the term cyber stalking or to explain what
amounts to monitoring the use of any electronic communication.amendment is a
step in the right direction to tackle the issue of cyber stalking, but it is
wholly incompetent It leaves too much burden on the Judiciary to interpret and
reinterpret the law to suit the circumstances of each case and Section 354D
alone cannot ensure effective justice to the victims .In my opinion, stalking law in India has a lot of drawbacks
to overcome, to become an efficient piece of legislation.
Thank you
ReplyDeleteThank you
ReplyDelete