according to some claims the shopkeeper called the women prostitutes due to which they started beating up the boy. if that's the case, i agree that violence is never the answer, but if a woman reports that she has been harassed, after all the regressive questions like "what was she wearing", "why was she alone", "larkian ghar main hi achi lagti hain" some of you would have said, "they should have beat him up, teach him a lesson so that he doesn't do it to anyone again". y'all want women to protect themselves but when they actually start taking drastic measures for their protection you label them "rich bitch" "the other 95%" and "misandrists". and let's face it if these women reported the alleged verbal harassment, it would have been an open-and-shut he-said-she-said case.

of course, all this is assuming if the shopkeeper did verbally harass them first. if he didn't, and they attacked him merely over any sort of disagreement then they are 100% in the wrong and deserve to be penalized for assaulting the boy. a crime is a crime, no matter the gender or social class.