Kerala High Court Directs Writer-Activist Civic Chandran To Surrender Before Police For Interrogation In Sexual Harassment Case
Cancelling author and social activist Civic Chandran's anticipatory bail in a sexual harassment case, the Kerala High Court on Thursday directed him to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days for subjecting himself for interrogation.Justice A. Badharudeen while allowing the petitions moved by the victim and the Government against the grant of anticipatory bail to Chandran...
Cancelling author and social activist Civic Chandran's anticipatory bail in a sexual harassment case, the Kerala High Court on Thursday directed him to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days for subjecting himself for interrogation.
Justice A. Badharudeen while allowing the petitions moved by the victim and the Government against the grant of anticipatory bail to Chandran by Sessions Court, said in the event of his arrest, he shall be produced before the Special Judge on the date of arrest itself.
"On such production, if regular bail application will be filed, after serving copy of the same to the counsel appearing for the defacto complainant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor in advance, to provide opportunity of hearing, the learned Special Judge shall consider the same on merits and pass orders as early as possible, preferably on the same day itself without much delay, since there is no statutory bar in granting regular bail in an appropriate case," said the court.
The Court further added that if the accused requires medical attention after the arrest, the Investigating officer ought to provide him with proper medical aid.
The Kerala State Government and the De Facto Complainant had challenged the anticipatory bail granted to Chandran, arguing that the order is against the spirit of the special law enacted for Prevention of Atrocities against the people belonging to SC/ST community.
The accused was booked in a sexual harassment case punishable under Sections 354, 354 A(1)(ii), 354A(2), 354 D(2) IPC and relevant provisions under the SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1999. During the course of investigation, the accused had sought anticipatory bail, and despite the objection from the prosecution and the victim, the pre-arrest bail was granted by the trial court.
Observing that that prima facie case is made out alleging the commission of offences under the SC/ST Act and Section 354 of IPC, the court said impugned order granting anticipatory bail to the accused in the case in derogation of the specific bar under Sections 18 and 18-A of the SC/ST Act stands set aside.
The Court also set aside the observations made by the sessions court in the impugned order wherein it had said that "is highly unbelievable that the touching or hugging as alleged by the victim that the accused had a knowledge about her caste, the accused is a reformist and is engaged in social activities and he is against the caste system. He is writing and fighting for a casteless society. In such a circumstance it is highly unbelievable that he will touch the body of the victim fully knowing that she is member of scheduled caste."
Justice Badharudeen further said that the court is not inclined to hold that the delay in lodging the F.I.R as explained in the First Information Statement is insufficient in the facts of this case, prima facie.
The Court in the order further observed that the offence alleged to be committed by the accused under Section 354 of I.P.C is one in the schedule of the SC/ST Act, and therefore commission of offence under Section 354 of I.P.C would attract offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, if the knowledge is foreseeable.
"In this matter, the accused and defacto complainant are very familiar to each other as could be discernible from the prosecution records and other materials. Therefore, the required knowledge of the accused that the defacto complainant is a member of Scheduled Caste is well discernible from the materials available as ascribed in Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act," said the court.
It added that in the matter of grant of anticipatory bail, the specific bar under Sections 18-A of the SC/ST Act would apply.
Furthermore, the Court observed that in cases involving serious offences under the SC/ST Act where anticipatory bail is specifically barred by the statute, mere illness of the accused is not a ground for granting anticipatory bail as it is against the mandate of the statute, where custodial interrogation or medical test etc., are necessary in particular.
Before parting, Justice Badharudeen took note of the fact that there is increase in the number of atrocities and harassment committed against girl children and women. It is the need of the hour that all concerned, especially the Investigating Officers and the Stakeholders, to rise to the occasion and bestow their efforts to arrest the criminals and to "give insight to the society" in this regard, said the court
The Same Sessions Court which passed the impugned order had also granted anticipatory bail to the Writer-Activist in another sexual harassment case in which it is alleged that the accused made sexual advances towards a young female writer and tried to outrage her modesty in a camp convened at Nandi beach in February 2020.
While granting anticipatory bail in that case, the Court had observed that the offence under Section 354A of the Indian Penal Code is not prima facie attracted as the woman was wearing 'sexually provocative dresses'. The observation was recently set aside by the high court. However, the grant of pre-arrest bail in that case was upheld.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. Civic Chandran @ V. Kuttan and XXXXX v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 530