India / Sexual harassment complaint not stand if woman wears provocative dress says kerala high court

New Delhi : The discussion has started on the remarks made in the sexual harassment case of the court of Kozhikode district of North Kerala. While granting anticipatory bail to the accused, the court said that if the woman was wearing a provocative dress, then prima facie a case of sexual harassment under section 354 of the IPC is not made out against the accused. Controversy has started over this decision of the court. Judge S. Krishnakumar made the remarks while giving an advance bail to activist and writer Civic Chandran. Chandran was accused of molesting a writer two years ago.

Women activists and former judges have raised objections to the court's remarks. Not only this, a demand has been made on their behalf that the High Court should now intervene in this matter. Apart from this, the victim has also said that she will soon approach the High Court. While granting bail to Chandran, the judge observed, "The photographs furnished by the accused along with his application suggest that the complainant was wearing a dress which was provocative. Therefore, the case against the accused under section 354 is not made out. At the same time, questioning this decision, the close relatives of the victim said that it is surprising that some pictures from social media were presented in the court.

The court raised the question, why was the case registered only after two years

The court also said that it should come to the fore as to why there was delay in registration of FIR in this case. The FIR in this case was registered after two years, while the incident is being told of February 2020. The woman who filed the complaint says that there was a conference of writers and the incident happened during that time. In her complaint, the woman said that the accused writer used to call her frequently and harass her. When the author crossed all limits, then he decided to file a complaint.

How can a 74-year-old elderly and handicapped force him?

The court also cited the age and physical condition of the accused. The court said, "Even if it is assumed that there was physical contact, it is difficult to believe how a person of 74 years of age and physically handicapped can forcibly make someone sit on his lap and press his private part." could. In such a case, anticipatory bail should be given to the accused in this case.