The Delhi High Court has issued a sharp rebuke to the city's police force, highlighting a disturbing pattern of "gross misuse" in how First Information Reports (FIRs) concerning the outraging of a woman's modesty are drafted. The court specifically pointed out the mechanical inclusion of the phrase "haath maara" (touched inappropriately) in every such complaint, often without the actual endorsement of the complainant.
A Court's Stern Observation on Police Practice
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made these significant remarks while hearing a petition to quash an FIR and related criminal proceedings. The case stemmed from a settlement reached between the complainant, an event manager, and the accused individuals. The accused were alleged to have assaulted the woman while under the influence of alcohol and tried to force her to dance.
The court, in its order dated December 17, 2025, stated, "It is unfortunate that in every FIR under Section 354, typically the words 'haath mara' are being written, which is not being endorsed by the Complainant." Justice Krishna emphasized that this habitual practice represents a serious misuse of legal provisions and demands immediate introspection at the level of individual police stations.
The Case Details and Amicable Settlement
The incident in question led to an FIR being registered not under the Indian Penal Code's Section 354, but under the corresponding Section 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Both sections deal with assault or use of criminal force against a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty, punishable by imprisonment of one to five years and a fine.
During the proceedings, it was revealed that the survivor and the accused had reached an amicable settlement on December 3, 2025, with the intervention of common friends. The settlement agreement included a clause that both parties would not initiate any further complaints or proceedings against each other and would live peacefully in the future.
The complainant was physically present in court and confirmed she had no objection to quashing the FIR. The court, satisfied that the settlement was entered into voluntarily, without fear or coercion, proceeded to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings.
Broader Implications and Judicial Directives
Going beyond the specific case, the High Court's order carries crucial directives to curb this problematic trend. The court directed that a copy of its order be sent to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) concerned. The purpose is to ensure that police officials refrain from inserting "conjured or unendorsed averments" into complaints filed by citizens.
This judicial intervention underscores a critical gap in police documentation, where a serious allegation like outraging modesty risks being reduced to a clichéd, boilerplate phrase. The court's stance aims to protect the sanctity of legal processes and ensure that FIRs accurately reflect the victim's account, not assumed or standardized narratives.
The ruling also brings into focus the judiciary's role in scrutinizing police procedures. By calling for introspection at the police station level, the Delhi High Court has highlighted the need for greater accountability and precision in the initial stages of registering a criminal case, which forms the foundation of any subsequent legal action.
