New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday appreciated the courage exhibited by the women, who unfazed by implications, both personal and professional, came forward to lodge complaints of sexual abuse in the Kerala film industry. The apex court stressed that the investigating agencies must also respect the women who wanted to stay quiet.
The matter came up before a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta. One of the judges on the bench orally remarked that facing all odds, these women came forward.
The bench appreciated the women victims and the witnesses, who brought out the matter before Justice Hema Committee, and later recorded statements before a state-appointed special investigation team (SIT). The entire process led to the lodging of over 25 FIRs.
The apex court was hearing a plea filed by a film producer, Sajimon Parayil, claiming that the Kerala High Court had in October 2024 directed the SIT to register FIRs on each and every statement made by victims/witnesses to the Justice Hema Committee. The petitioner was represented by senior advocate R. Basant in the apex court.
The petitioner questioned the high court emphasising on the registration of the FIRs despite the “disinclination” expressed by the witnesses/victims themselves. The petitioner's plea contended that the witnesses and victims were against the SIT taking any action on the basis of their statements to the Justice Hema Committee.
During the hearing today, the bench questioned petitioner’s locus standi. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the high court order should not be used to harass people because that “would be a travesty of justice”.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) and victims of sexual abuse, contended before the bench the committee was a relief to many women. He added that victims choose to stay quiet for two reasons, loss of profession and the fact that the minute they would describe the film set, they will be identified.
The Kerala State Women’s Commission, represented by advocate Parvathi Menon, claimed that the petitioner was indirectly trying to stall the investigation.
The apex court made it clear that the SIT could not unilaterally register FIRs in the cases of women who, after making statements before the committee, chose not to pursue the matter or initiate criminal proceedings against their alleged perpetrators.
The bench asked the Kerala government’s counsel, “How can you register a crime without evidence, without witnesses coming forward? We are just saying there is no requirement for registering a crime once the SIT finds there is no witness coming forward with her statement…”.
However, the bench stressed that wherever witnesses come forward, the crime must be registered and proceeded according to the law.
After hearing submissions, the bench reserved the order in the matter and told the counsel, for various parties, that it would pronounce the order on January 27.
Read more
