Mangaluru: 24-year-old woman alleges sexual harassment on city bus, Instagram post goes viral
Here’s what the victim, police officials told Vartha Bharati
Mangaluru: A 24-year-old woman on Thursday evening took to her Instagram account alleging sexual harassment by a co-passenger on a city bus in Mangaluru. The post has now gone viral and has received wide public response who have come forward and have spoken against such criminal behavior by co-passengers on city buses here.
The victim was on her way from Konaje towards Pumpwell on Thursday, 14 January when an unidentified man boarded the bus in which she was traveling and sat next to her even as there were other vacant seats on the bus.
According to the woman, the man who boarded the bus from a bus stop near KS Hedge Hospital started touching her inappropriately. Irked by his behavior, she confronted the man, following which he apologized and switched his seat before getting down from the bus.
“After he got down from the bus, I felt relieved as well as disgusted with other passengers who witnessed my confrontation and chose to remain silent even as I shouted at the offender,” the victim told Vartha Bharati over a phone call.
What shocked her was, seeing the offender boarding the bus again after a couple of stops and coming back to sitting next to her, she added in the post.
She told Vartha Bharati that the offender started behaving inadequately again and sexually harassed her by touching her inappropriately.
“That’s when I decided I was not going to take it lightly. As I approached my stop i.e. Pumpwell, I once again shouted at him and clicked his picture while also warning him of posting his picture across social media platforms. To my surprise, that person took off his mask and posed for the picture on my phone, and when I clicked his picture he thanked me for clicking the picture” she further informed Vartha Bharati.
“When I was about to get down on my station, out of frustration and to teach him a lesson, I once again shouted at him and also kicked him while expecting support or reaction from other passengers or the bus conductor. But nobody turned up for my help, they were being mere spectators of what they perhaps thought was the drama” she added.
On being asked if she plans to take legal measures against the offender, she said she has already filed a complaint at Mangaluru Women Police Station and has received an NC for it.
“I don’t want to get someone arrested. It is not about one person. Several women and men too are being harassed like this on buses in the city. I want to create awareness and want people to talk about it and seek help. In most cases, the victims don’t talk about it for various reasons. I want them to talk about it and respond. Arresting one person will not help, nor will silently bearing such behaviors help” she added.
The Instagram post was well received by social media users and in no time has grossed nearly 65K likes at the time of publishing of this report. Hundreds of users have also shared their views in the comment section of the post and several others have lauded her for being gutsy enough to talk about what she went through.
Users were also of the opinion that several women go through the same every day but choose to remain silent which in return encourages the offenders to continue such behaviors as they go unchecked.
Women Police Station PSI Rosamma however confirmed that no FIR was filed in the case, as the victim had not filed a written complaint or had sought filing of FIR against any unidentified person. But she added the department was mulling to run awareness campaigns in this regard. She also added that several campaigns were initiated earlier, but were forced down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, last year.
Rosamma, while talking to Vartha Bharati also stressed that women need to talk about any such harassment or inadequate behavior by co-passengers on public transport and has assured immediate action on incidents that are reported.
View this post on Instagram
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Shobha Karandlaje urges Governor to withhold assent to Karnataka hate speech bill
Bengaluru (PTI): Union Minister of State Shobha Karandlaje on Friday urged Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot to withhold assent to the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025, terming the Bill "vague, overbroad, and susceptible to misuse".
She also requested him to reserve the Bill for the consideration of President Droupadi Murmu under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, in the larger interest of constitutional governance, democratic freedoms, and the rule of law.
The bill, passed by both houses of the legislature, will be sent to the Governor for his assent.
Taking to social media 'X', the minister said, "The Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill 2025 hands the State sweeping authority to silence opposition voices, restrain the media, and intimidate the citizens who defend Karnataka's land, language, and Dharma. This isn't a hate speech prevention bill, it's rather a bill that prevents the right to speech." "We will not let Congress turn the law into a tool to choke free speech and democratic dissent," she added.
In a letter to the governor, Karandlaje said the objective of the Bill is to address hate speech and hate crimes. However, upon careful examination, it becomes evident that the Bill, in its present form, establishes a "State-controlled mechanism" for monitoring, assessing, and penalising speech, rather than narrowly addressing expression that poses a clear and imminent threat to public order.
"The structure of the Bill enables executive authorities to determine the permissibility of expression, thereby transforming the law into a tool capable of suppressing voices critical of the government. Such an approach undermines the constitutional guarantee of democratic dissent and free expression," she said.
Citing reference of article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India that guarantees freedom of speech and expression to every citizen, she said, "The Bill departs from these constitutional limits by employing broad, vague, and subjective expressions such as "disharmony," "ill-will," and "prejudicial interest," which are not precisely defined. These terms confer excessive discretion on the Executive, enabling arbitrary and selective enforcement, which is inconsistent with constitutional safeguards."
She said the constitutional infirmities of the present Bill must be examined in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015), wherein the Court held that any law regulating speech must be clear, narrowly tailored and free from vagueness.
The minister alleged that the Bill further authorises executive authorities and law-enforcement agencies to assess and act upon speech without adequate judicial oversight. Penal consequences are linked to executive assessment, thereby concentrating investigative and adjudicatory functions within the Executive.
"Such an arrangement erodes procedural safeguards and is inconsistent with constitutional principles governing the protection of fundamental rights," she alleged.
Karandlaje also pointed out the potential impact of the Bill on "historically marginalised" and "constitutionally protected" voices.
"The vague and expansive language of the legislation is capable of being invoked to silence Kannada language activists, women's organisations, representatives of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, backward classes, minorities, journalists, student groups, and civil society organisations that raise issues of governance, social justice, or administrative accountability," she said.
Instead of empowering vulnerable communities, according to the minister, the Bill risks becoming an instrument to deter them from articulating grievances and participating meaningfully in public discourse, thereby defeating the very constitutional promise of equality, dignity, and inclusive democracy.
The minister alleged that the cumulative effect of the Bill is likely to create a "pervasive chilling effect" on public discourse, which is incompatible with democratic governance.
Pointing out that the Bill directly impacts fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution, she said, "In view of the serious constitutional questions it raises, this is a fit case for the exercise of constitutional discretion under Article 200. Reserving the Bill for the consideration of the President would enable a broader constitutional examination of its implications for civil liberties and the federal constitutional balance."
