Vlogger Sreekanth Vettiyar Approaches Kerala High Court Seeking Pre-Arrest Bail In Rape Case

Popular content creator and vlogger Sreekanth Vettiyar has moved the Kerala High Court seeking anticipatory bail after a woman filed an official complaint accusing him of rape.

Justice Gopinath P. directed the Public Prosecutor to get instructions and posted the matter to be taken up again on February 2.  

Vettiyar, known in the State for his 'woke humour', was accused of having raped a woman on the pretext of marrying her. He was thereby booked under Section 376 (2)(n) of IPC.

The survivor complained that he pretended to be in love with her and sexually abused her on February 15, 2021 at Swas Aqua-City Hat on his birthday with a promise to marry her.

The survivor had posted about the incident on social media on a page named 'Women Against Sexual Harassment' on January 9.

However, in his plea, the petitioner has contended that they were in a consensual physical relationship and that the imputations raised against him were prima facie unfounded. 

"The very nature of the allegations raised in the instant crime when read as a whole, makes it explicit that the same is nothing but a consensual act of physical relationship between two adult members, while being in love," reads the petition.

Filed through Advocates M. Revi Krishnan and Rahul Sunil, the application stated that he apprehends immediate arrest since serious non-bailable offices have been alleged against him. 

He pleaded innocent of the allegations raised against him and argued that he has been falsely implicated in the case with ulterior motives and vexatious intentions. 

According to Vettiyar, he got acquainted with the survivor through a Facebook group called KU back in 2015. 

He added that since both of them were active members of the group, he used to visit her at her residence as well as her workplace frequently.

The application further states that he was aware that she was a divorcee with a child, and that eventually, they grew close.

One contradiction pointed out by the petitioner is that although the woman says that she was expecting other people at his birthday ceremony, in the FIS she has admitted to having brought food for only the two of them. 

Moreover, he argued that despite accusing him of forcing himself on her, she admitted that she stayed there till 12 am and spent the next day with him as well. 

According to the petitioner, this was sufficient to question the veracity of the alleged story put forward by her. 

On October 20, 2021, the survivor allegedly came to know that the Vettiyar had cheated other women in a similar manner. Thereafter, she confronted the vlogger in December 2021 and he allegedly insulted her. The petitioner argued that it was this violation that pushed her to file a false complaint against him. 

He added that the time gap between the two incidents was 8 months and that it clearly showed that it was not a forceful act. 

It was also pointed out that the second time has been admitted to be a consensual one. 

"Considering the second incident to be a consensual act casts a serious doubt as to whether the parties have refrained from any sexual activity in the past 8 months," reads the plea. 

Similarly, Vettiyar asserted that a physical relationship entered into between two persons who have attained the age of majority on an expectation to marry on a future date by itself cannot constitute a mistake of fact as stipulated under the Evidence Act. 

The petitioner further claimed that subsequent failure to comply with the promise to marry, which can be on account of several supervening circumstances including the temperamental differences between the parties, cannot by itself make the male member visit the harsh consequence of a rape charge. 

On these grounds, he argued that an allegation under Section 376 IPC was beyond comprehension. 

Case Title: Sreekanth Vettiyar v. State of Kerala