KOCHI: A woman IFS officer, who retired as the principal chief conservator of forests (PCCF) in 2022, has submitted a review petition before the Supreme Court challenging the Kerala High Court order that set aside the conviction of former minister A Neelalohithadasan Nadar in a case regarding a sexual abuse case filed by her.
According to Prakriti Srivastava, a 1990 batch IFS officer, the High Court erroneously reversed the findings of the trial court and the sessions court, which had found Nadar guilty of outraging the modesty of the victim.
Pointing out that the High Court has not heard the victim, she said no notice was served on the petitioner in the revision proceedings at any stage and she had no opportunity to present her arguments. The High Court had set aside the conviction of Nadar on September 15, 2025 and a special leave petition filed by Prakriti was dismissed by the Supreme Court in January.
As per the petition, the victim experienced sexual assault from the minister on February 27, 1999, at the Government Guest House in Kozhikode where she was called by the minister on official grounds as she was serving as the Divisional Forest Officer in Kozhikode. She had raised the issue with senior department officials, police officer and the Women’s Commission. A written complaint was filed on March 25, 2001.
In a letter to the Kerala chief secretary, Prakriti Srivastava said the High Court order is shocking and a travesty of justice. She said the state needs to file an appeal immediately before the Supreme Court and get the accused convicted.
“None of Kerala cadre officers took any action and left me at the mercy of the predator. Nadar kept making calls to me and trying to find an opportunity to molest me yet again which I avoided. I was petrified after the incident till the case was finally filed. This was followed by another complaint by IAS officer Nalini Netto, who was serving as the secretary of transport department under the same minister in February 2000,” she said.
According to Prakriti, the ADGP (Crimes) who summoned her to record statement failed to register a case. He did not even include her evidence as a witness in the Nalini Netto’s case. “This was the extent of intimidation and callousness I was facing at the hands of the state machinery,” she said.
“While the High Court order finds fault with the victim in delay of two years in filing the case, it fails to take responsibility for the delay of almost 20 years in passing the order. It may also be noted that after the incident, I have run from pillar to post informing all authorities concerned about the incident but it was not redressed in any way. There was no delay on my part and it was the apathy of all authorities which did not take action despite my repeated complaints,” said Prakriti.