Bombay HC Relief To Banker Who Asked Employee To Convince Clients Like She Convinces Her Husband, Says No Intent To Outrage Modesty

The Bombay High Court recently quashed an 'outraging modesty' FIR lodged against an Assistant General Manager of the State Bank of India (SBI) who was booked for telling a senior woman clerk that "she should convince the clients as she convince her husband." 

A division bench of Justices Anil Kilor and Pravin Patil while quashing the FIR observed that there was no intention on part of the petitioner - Satyaswarup Meshram, as whatever he uttered was only for enhancing the complainant woman's performance. 

The bench noted that Meshram worked as an Assistant General Manager (AGM) of the Bank and was posted in Gondia and given his position, he was required to perform many administrative works and majorly act as a connecting link between the workforce and senior management. The petitioner, the judges said, being an AGM was required to perform many responsibilities to ensure smooth functioning and maintain business efficiency within the organisation. The officer on such a post therefore, often requires to interact with the colleagues from different departments and to hold meetings to boost the staff's confidence, morals and motivation to ensure compliance with the organisational policies, the bench noted.

"Thus, in the case in hand considering the purpose of meeting dated August 11, 2021 and reasons to utter such words during the meeting do not show any intention of the applicant to insult the modesty of the complainant. Particularly, when whole object and purpose of such conversation of the applicant with the complainant was to see that her performance should be improved while performing her official duties," the bench held. 

According to the complainant, the petitioner being the AGM visited the Bhandara branch of SBI on August 11, 2021 reviewed the performance of the employees of the bank. She alleged that the petitioner was dissatisfied with her performance and he expressed it by uttering the words that she should try to convince the customer as she convince her husband. She therefore, alleged that utterance of these words amounts to insult to her modesty.

She also referred to the subsequent incidences dated August 28, 2022 and September 16, 2022, which have not been clearly specified by the bench in the order copy. 

"As far as incidents dated September 16, 2022 and August 28, 2022 are concerned, at the most it can be said that the words used are disgraceful. But, in any case those cannot be considered as words insulting modesty of the complainant," the bench said. 

With these observations, the bench quashed the FIR against Meshram.

Appearance:

Advocate AP Modak appeared for the Applicant.

Additional Public Prosecutor Mayuri Deshmukh represented the State.

Advocate Ayushi Dangre represented the Complainant. 

Case Title: Satyaswarup Meshram vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 736 of 2023)

Click Here To Read/Download Order