The Kerala High Court on Wednesday stayed the Kozhikode Sessions Court order granting anticipatory bail to social activist and writer Civic Chandran in a sexual assault case.
Justice Kauser Edappagath, however, ordered that considering the age of the writer, he shall not be arrested till the disposal of the appeal filed by the State government challenging the Sessions Court order.
The High Court, while passing the interim order, observed that the findings of the sessions court that Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (related to sexual harassment) would not prima facie stand against the accused as the victim was wearing sexually provocative dresses could not be justified.
The court added that prima facie it appeared that there was an improper exercise of jurisdiction by the sessions court. Irrelevant materials were seen relied upon by the court while granting him bail.
According to the complainant, the writer allegedly outraged her modesty on February 8, 2020 at a cultural camp held at the Nandi beach in Kozhikode. The case was registered on July 29, 2022.
In its appeal seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the writer, the State government contended that the reasons given in the sessions court order for the bail were per se “illegal.” The findings for the bail were “perverse.”
Sexually provocative dressing of a person could not be construed as a legal ground for absolving an accused from the charge of outraging the modesty of a woman. The sessions court had heavily relied on certain photographs of the survivor published on social media while giving the reason for the grant of bail, the government said.
The appeal pointed out that the sessions court had flouted all the guidelines laid down for granting bail to accused in sexual assault cases. In fact, the Supreme court had already held that discussion about the dress, behaviour or past ‘conduct’ or morals of the survivor should not be written in the verdict while granting bail to the accused. The observation by the sessions judge amounts to judicial indiscipline and is liable to be expunged.
Besides, the findings of the sessions court had the effect of potentially traumatising the survivor, apart from being insensitive, insulting and anti-women. The court’s offending remarks had to be expunged from the order as otherwise, it would harm the public trust in the judicial system, the appeal stated.
