Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman
Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman. Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, 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 wit The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, 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 one year, or with fine, or with both.
Section 509, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 79 Word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman Text carried over almost unchanged 96%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 24
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 154 Information in cognizable cases
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 161 Examination of witnesses by police
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 164 Recording of confessions and statements
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 197 Prosecution of Judges and public servants
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 154 Information in cognizable cases
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 161 Examination of witnesses by police
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 164 Recording of confessions and statements
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 197 Prosecution of Judges and public servants
- Criminal Law (Aunachal Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 s. 13
- Criminal Law (Aunachal Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 s. 14
- Criminal Law (Aunachal Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 s. 15
- Criminal Law (Aunachal Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 s. 17
and 12 more
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Badrinarayana Jaganathan vs The State of Karnataka
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Criminal proceedings initiated on allegations that fail to disclose prima facie ingredients of the offences charged, where the underlying dispute is fundamentally civil in nature (employment termination), and where procedural irregularities and discrepancies suggest deliberate misclassification of the matter to transform a civil dispute into criminal proceedings for purposes of coercion or settlement, constitute an abuse of legal process and travesty of justice warranting quashing of the chargesheet and proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The essential ingredients of criminal offences must be strictly established: Section 323 requires voluntary act of causing actual hurt; Sections 504 and 509 require specific intentional insult with contextual details and intent to provoke or shock sense of decency; Section 506 requires threat with intent to cause alarm, not mere assertion of consequences of lawful termination. Mere allegations without substantiation of these ingredients do not justify continuation of criminal proceedings.
On this section: Insult to modesty of woman - Court examined whether 'filthy language' without contextual details, specific words, or accompanying gestures could shock sense of decency; found ingredients not satisfied
-
Harbhajan Singh vs State of Punjab
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a court is presented with prima facie material consisting of a dying declaration naming specific persons as responsible for the victim's suicide, corroborated by the testimony of credible prosecution witnesses that those persons had engaged in a sustained course of threats and harassment, the extraordinary power under Section 319 CrPC to summon such persons as additional accused should be exercised. The fact that such persons were not initially chargesheeted does not prevent the Court from exercising this jurisdiction at a later stage if evidence adduced during trial discloses their participation in the commission of an offence. This power should be used sparingly and only when compelling reasons exist, which are present when the evidence is sufficient to support a reasonable possibility of conviction at the conclusion of the trial.
On this section: Various charges mentioned in the FIR - Outraging modesty (Section 509), Cheating (Section 420), Criminal Conspiracy (Section 120-B), Criminal Breach of Trust (Section 456)
-
Madhavi Tata v. State of Telangana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Final Order order-1.pdf 2015-12-31 DATE VERIFIED. CrlP 6794/2015. B. Siva Sankara Rao. 482 quash of a 509 / IT 67 / IRWA FIR over an Outlook satire/caricature. Following Khushboo: s.509 requires a word, gesture or act intending to insult the modesty of a particular woman or identifiable group; contemporary community standards and Art 19(1)(a) govern obscenity. The unnamed satirical piece, judged as a whole, does not make out 509. Do not remap it-act 67 or crpc 482 (already filled). Badrinarayana Jaganathan SCIN010392702019 order-7.pdf is a pronouncement ROP — skip.
On this section: s.509 requires a word, gesture or act intending to insult the modesty of a particular woman (Khushboo). An unnamed satirical caricature judged as a whole under contemporary community standards is not enough (Madhavi Tata).
-
Gaurav vs State of Hp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Security proceedings under Sections 107 and 150 CrPC are preventive in nature and do not bar subsequent FIR registration for cognizable offences arising from the same incident. Discharge in security proceedings is not acquittal and does not attract the prohibition of double jeopardy under Section 300 CrPC. A person discharged in preventive proceedings may be prosecuted for criminal offences based on the same facts. The High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings, should only examine whether allegations prima facie constitute an offence without conducting a mini-trial or appreciating evidence. Contradictions in complaint or complainant statement are not grounds for quashing FIR at threshold stage.
On this section: Word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty - applied to vulgar language about wife
-
Shimpu Alias Som Dutt vs State of Hp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving serious criminal charges under the SC/ST Atrocities Act and POCSO Act, bail may be granted by the High Court under Section 439 CrPC if the accused demonstrates cooperation with investigation and willingness to submit to court authority, provided that stringent and comprehensive conditions are imposed to protect victims, prevent witness intimidation, ensure investigation cooperation, and maintain trial integrity. The court must apply the Arnesh Kumar principles while tailoring conditions to the specific circumstances of each case.
On this section: Charge of word, gesture, or act intended to insult modesty; considered in assessing seriousness of charges
-
Yanamadala Anil Chand vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a person has been acquitted in most criminal cases, has not been involved in any criminal activity for several years, and has no pending cases, the continuation of a rowdy sheet without any current justification may be deemed arbitrary. In such circumstances, the appropriate remedy is to permit the person to make a representation before the competent police authority (Sub-Divisional Police Officer) for closure of the rowdy sheet, rather than granting absolute mandamus, thereby balancing law enforcement interests with individual rehabilitation rights.
On this section: Cited in context of criminal case for word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty
-
State of Maharashtra vs Sushant Suresh Kotkar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When prosecution witnesses, particularly the complainant and the victim themselves, turn hostile and do not support the prosecution case in their testimony, and no other credible evidence is brought on record to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to acquittal. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and mere allegations without supporting evidence from credible witnesses are insufficient for conviction.
On this section: Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a person - Applied in conjunction with Section 354-A for the allegations against the minor victim
-
Arjun Himagiri vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the complainant has withdrawn her grievance, the parties have amicably settled their dispute, the prosecution has no serious objection, no public interest is involved, and no fruitful purpose would be served by proceeding with the case, the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the charge sheet in the interest of justice and to secure the ends of justice.
On this section: Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a person - one of the charges against the accused
-
Yahiya vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving offences against women, anticipatory bail may be granted if stringent conditions are imposed to ensure investigation cooperation, prevent further offences, and protect the complainant and witnesses. The court must balance the rights of the accused with the interests of justice, investigation, and public safety, considering factors such as the nature of offences, history of the accused, and the effectiveness of proposed bail conditions.
On this section: Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman - applied to the accused for pressing the complainant's breast
-
Rashmi Srivastav vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a complainant's information is laid with the police but no action is taken, the complainant must approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 190 read with Section 200 CrPC rather than seeking writ jurisdiction from the High Court. The High Court cannot exercise writ jurisdiction to direct police to register an FIR; this is the exclusive domain of the Magistrate who can enquire into the complaint and direct investigation if prima facie case is established.
On this section: Alleged offence of word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a person, cited as basis for FIR registration sought by petitioner
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 509
What have the courts held on Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code?
Badrinarayana Jaganathan vs The State of Karnataka (24 Jan 2025) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Insult to modesty of woman - Court examined whether 'filthy language' without contextual details, specific words, or accompanying gestures could shock sense of decency; found ingredients not satisfied. Another 9 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2006 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IPC 509, section 509 IPC, section 509 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 509 in bns and ipc 509 punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 10 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Badrinarayana Jaganathan vs The State of Karnataka (24 Jan 2025).
What should I read with Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
24 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 79 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 509, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.