Kerala High Court Quashes Sexual Harassment Case Against Actor Unni Mukundan Based On Settlement Between Parties
The Kerala High Court today quashed the proceedings against Malayalam film actor Unni Mukundan where he was facing prosecution for offences under Sections 354 (Assault of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and Section 354-B (Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe) of the IPC, based on a settlement between the parties.Justice P. Gopinath...
The Kerala High Court today quashed the proceedings against Malayalam film actor Unni Mukundan where he was facing prosecution for offences under Sections 354 (Assault of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and Section 354-B (Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe) of the IPC, based on a settlement between the parties.
Justice P. Gopinath observed thus:
“The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the entire issue between the petitioner and the de facto complainant have been settled. It is submitted that at the instance of the petitioner certain complaints were filed against the de facto complainant and those proceedings have also been terminated on the ground of settlement between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. It is submitted that the this is a fit case where the further proceedings against the petitioner can be terminated on the ground of settlement.”
The Court further noted that the statement of the de facto complainant was recorded based on an earlier order of the Court and the complainant submitted vide video conferencing that she does not want to continue the proceedings against the petitioner.
The Court referred to Apex Court decisions and observed that proceedings against the petitioner can be quashed on the settlement between the parties and no public interest would be served in continuing the proceedings.
The case relates to a sexual harassment complaint filed by a woman in 2017 where the actor was accused of sexual harassment. The allegation was that the actor caught hold of her and forcefully kissed her and attempted to commit rape when she visited him to discuss a movie project. It was alleged that the act of the petitioner had outraged the modesty of the de facto complainant.
Earlier, the Court had refused to quash the proceedings against the petitioner on the finding that the prosecution had submitted evidences that proved prima facie case against him. In an earlier plea moved by the petitioner for quashing the criminal proceedings against him, his request was denied and interim stay granted to him was vacated after the counsel for the complainant stated that the Court was misled into believing that the matter had been settled between the parties.
On the basis of the submission before the Court today that the matter has been settled between the parties, the Court quashed the proceedings initiated against the petitioner pursuant to CC 1417/2017 on the file of Judicial First-Class Magistrate Court-IX, Ernakulam.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Adv. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Benny Antony Parel, Anoop Sebastian, Pramitha Agustine, Irine Mathew, Adithya Kiran V.E, Anjali Nair, Naail Fathima Abdulla A , Swathy Sudhir.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 485
Case Title: Unni Mukundan V State of Kerala