Chandigarh, Sept. 23 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has said that attempts made by a person to talk to a stranger woman could be unwelcome or annoying but do not constitute a crime of outraging modesty of the woman. The HC bench of justice Kirti Singh ordered quashing of an FIR registered against one Gaurav Khatri, registered in Rohtak in July 2020, while clarifying that to constitute an offence under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code to sustain, criminal force must be applied against her and such application of force must be with the intent to outrage her modesty. "To the considered mind of this court, the said act (petitioner's act), though can be seen as annoying and unwelcome, cannot be said to be such as to shock the sense of decency of a woman," the court observed. The petitioner had approached HC in 2024 challenging the charges framed against him under Section 354 of IPC (which deals with the assault or use of criminal force with an intent to outrage modesty of a woman). He had also sought quashing of the FIR. Section 354 of IPC had upto 5 years jail term punishment. The allegations were that Khatri along with one more person entered the library of PGIMS Rohtak. They misbehaved with a lady doctor and allegedly outraged her modesty. The matter was looked into by the internal sexual harassment committee which recommended registration of FIR. In HC, the petitioner had submitted that he himself was pursuing a medical programme from a Russian university, along with his friend, and visited the library of PGIMS, Rohtak. The petitioner had only greeted the prosecutrix and tried to initiate a conversation, however on being declined the indulgence, the petitioner left the premises. Hence, the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC are not made out. His lawyer had asserted that at no point in time were the allegations of assault or use of criminal force upon the prosecutrix against the petitioner were levelled. Rather, the prosecutrix in her testimony before the trial court stated that she does not have any complaint against the petitioner. Hence, the essentials constituting an offence under Section 354 IPC not having been made out even prima facie against the petitioner, continuation of criminal proceedings against him would tantamount to the abuse of process of law, his lawyer had submitted. Referring to the statement recorded by the woman before the trial court, the court observed that it is the own admission of the prosecutrix that the petitioner only tried initiating a conversation with her and upon her refusal to talk, he left the premises. "Given the facts and circumstances of the case, as ascertained from the contents of the FIR and the statements of the prosecutrix, especially so when the record is silent with respect to use of any criminal force by the petitioner, even primafacie, the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC are not made out," the court said while quashing the FIR....