Kerala HC stays anticipatory bail granted to Civic Chandran; rejects lower court order blaming victim's 'provocative dress'

The Supreme court held that discussion about the dress, behavior, past 'conduct', and morals of the victim should not enter the verdict while granting bail to the accused.
Civic Chandran.
Civic Chandran.

KOCHI: The Kerala High Court on Wednesday observed that the finding of the sessions court, Kozhikode that Section 354 A will not be prima facie attracted against writer Civic Chandran, accused in sexual harassment case, when the victim was wearing a sexually provocative dress cannot be justified. The court also stayed the order granting anticipatory bail to the accused till the appeal was disposed of. The appeal was filed by the state government seeking to cancel the bail order.

"The finding of the session's court order was Section 354 A will not be prima facie attracted when the victim was wearing a 'sexually provocative dress' can not be justified," observed Justice Kauser Edappagath. However, considering the age of the accused he shall not be arrested till the disposal of the appeal, said the court.

The court also said that "prima facie it appears that there was an improper exercise of jurisdiction by the Session Judge while granting bail to the accused. Irrelevant materials of substantial nature are seen relied on to grant bail." The court ordered to post the appeal immediately after vacation.

In the appeal, the state government submitted that the observation made by the Sessions Court, Kozhikode that the victim herself is dressed in 'sexually provocative dresses' is illegal. The sexually provocative dressing of a victim cannot be construed as a legal ground for absolving an accused from the charge of outraging the modesty of a woman.

According to the prosecution, on February 8, 2020, there was a cultural camp- "Nilanadatham" at Nandi beach. After the function, while the victim was taking a rest near the seashore, the accused forcefully embraced her and asked her to lie on his lap, and later outraged the modesty of the victim. The case was registered on July 29, 2022, and she clearly stated that the delay occurred due to fear and shame.

While granting bail, the sessions court heavily relied on certain photographs of the victim which were published on social media, and observed that the complainant herself is 'exposing to sexually provocative dresses' therefore Section 354 A will not prima facie stand against the accused. This has the effect of potentially exposing the survivor to secondary trauma. The order passed by the sessions judge is beyond his powers.

The Supreme court held that discussion about the dress, behavior, past 'conduct', and morals of the victim should not enter the verdict while granting bail to the accused. The observation by the sessions judge amounts to judicial indiscipline and is liable to be expunged.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com