KOCHI: The Kerala High Court on Monday orally observed that a special court would be needed to deal with matters concerning the Association of Malayalam Movie Artistes (A.M.M.A).
Justice Jobin Sebastian made the remarks while considering a petition filed by actor Lakshmi Priya and her husband, P Jayesh, of Thrippunithura, seeking to quash an FIR registered against them based on a complaint by actor Ansiba Hassan alleging harassment. The Hill Palace Police Station, Thrippunithura, registered an FIR against Malayalam actor Lakshmi Priya, her husband Jayesh and woman Sub-Inspector Reshma following a court directive on a harassment complaint filed by actor Ansiba Hassan.
The court orally remarked, “Several cases involving the life and livelihood concerns of the poor are pending before the court. Yet, it appears that the court has time only to consider matters related to the A.M.M.A association.”
Justice Jobin Sebastian had recently considered a petition filed by Ansiba against Lakshmi Priya and directed the magistrate to reconsider Ansiba’s complaint. Ansiba had approached the court seeking registration of an FIR against Lakshmi Priya, alleging that the latter had made sexually coloured remarks during an interview with a channel and that the video was subsequently shared on social media.
When Lakshmi Priya’s plea came up for hearing, the court said, “I had recently disposed of Ansiba’s case. Now, another actor has filed a new petition connected to Ansiba’s complaint.”
The court also issued notice to Ansiba through her counsel, who was appearing before the trial court as well as in a case that had been disposed of by the high court.
According to the prosecution, Ansiba Hassan sent a WhatsApp message to Lakshmi Priya’s mobile phone on December 10, 2025. The contents of the message were vague and allegedly created doubts and misunderstandings in Jayesh’s mind regarding Lakshmi Priya. The misunderstanding escalated into domestic friction, following which Lakshmi Priya filed a complaint with the police.
The prosecution further submitted that Ansiba subsequently raised the issue before AMMA, which led to further disputes. The petitioners’ counsel also pointed out that Ansiba had filed several complaints against Lakshmi Priya and other prominent members of A.M.M.A before different police stations. The prosecution alleged that the police officer, who acted on Lakshmi Priya’s complaint, threatened Ansiba in various ways and ultimately compelled her to sign settlement records. The officer allegedly wrongfully restrained and threatened Ansiba, thereby committing the offences mentioned in the FIR.
Senior advocate C P Udayabhanu, appearing for the petitioners, argued that Ansiba’s grievance was against the woman police officer who had officially intervened in the complaint filed by Lakshmi Priya. The petitioner had never interfered in Ansiba’s affairs, he argued.