‘What a Woman Wears Is Her Choice’: Delhi HC Convicts Man in Sexual Harassment Case

August 10, 2026

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday observed that a woman’s choice of clothing is a matter of personal choice and that neither society, neighbours nor any other person has the right to dictate what she should wear.

The observation came while the High Court allowed an appeal against the acquittal of a man accused of sexually harassing a young woman and convicted him under Section 354A(1)(i) of the IPC.

Delhi HC Rejects Argument Over Woman’s Clothes

A single-judge Bench of Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha took strong exception to the defence questioning the woman about her clothes, including her choice to wear jeans.

“What a girl or woman chooses to wear is a matter of her personal choice. Neither her neighbours, nor society, nor the accused, nor counsel appearing in a court of law has any right to dictate her clothing. It is simply none of their concern,” Justice Sudha said.

The case involved Sajid Ali, who was accused of repeatedly stalking the woman, making sexually coloured remarks and touching her cheeks and hip.

During the trial, the defence had questioned the woman about her clothes and objections allegedly raised by local residents over her wearing western attire.

The woman had told the court that she generally wore “normal jeans and top” and that some residents had objected to her clothing.

Justice Sudha said the line of questioning about the woman’s clothes was “wholly irrelevant, improper” and appeared aimed at embarrassing, humiliating and morally judging her.

Court Says Clothing Cannot Justify Harassment

The High Court said a woman’s choice of attire neither diminishes her dignity nor provides any justification for unlawful conduct against her.

It rejected the argument that the woman wearing jeans could “corrupt young boys”, saying the answer was not to control the clothes worn by girls and women.

“Parents and society must instead teach their children to control their conduct, respect personal boundaries, and treat every human with dignity,” the court said.

The judge also rejected attempts to bring religion and local customs into the case, observing that the woman’s religion, the religion of residents in the locality and her clothing had no connection with the issue before the court.

HC Warns Against Victim-Blaming in Court

Justice Sudha also referred to a complaint allegedly submitted by the accused and local residents, in which the woman’s living arrangement and her clothing were cited as alleged “crimes”.

The court said it was unable to find any law that the woman had violated by living with her mother without a male family member or by wearing the clothes mentioned in the complaint.

The High Court held that the woman’s clothing was no ground to disbelieve her testimony. It further observed that even a woman portrayed as being of “easy virtue” would remain entitled to privacy and legal protection.

The court found the woman’s testimony consistent regarding the accused’s unwanted physical contact and stalking. It held that touching her cheeks along with the comments made by him constituted an offence under Section 354A(1)(i) of the IPC.

The court accordingly convicted Sajid Ali of sexual harassment.

Court Warns Judicial Officers

The Delhi High Court also cautioned judicial officers that cross-examination cannot become a means to insult, shame, intimidate or harass a witness.

“The Court cannot remain a silent spectator while the dignity of a witness is attacked under the guise of cross-examination,” it said.

Justice Sudha directed that questions relating to a woman’s clothing, character, lifestyle, religion or personal choices should not be permitted unless they are strictly relevant to an issue arising in the case.

The court directed that a copy of the judgment be circulated among judicial officers in Delhi and forwarded to the Delhi Judicial Academy for appropriate training and sensitisation programmes.

Sajid Ali has been directed to appear before the Delhi High Court on Wednesday for hearing on the sentence.