Kerala High Court: In a petition filed by film and Ad director Sreekumar Menon to quash the proceedings in the criminal case filed by a Malayalam movie actress against him for offences of stalking, obscenity or intent to insult a woman’s modesty, S. Manu, J. held that no offence had been committed under Sections 354D, 294(b), and 509 of IPC, and Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act.
The Court noted that the offences alleged in the final report are under Sections 354D, 294(b), 509 of Penal Code and Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act.
After reviewing the facts of the case, the Court concluded that no offence had been committed under Section 354D of IPC, as following a woman to abuse or threaten will not fall within the scope of the penal provision.
Concerning offence under Section 294(b) of the IPC, the Court noted that the actress had alleged that on 09-12-2018, Sreekumar addressed her with a scurrilous Malayalam word and abused her when they met in Dubai Airport.
The Court noted that such an incident was not revealed by her in the petition submitted to the State Police Chief on 21-10-2019, and that at no point in time before her statement was recorded by police, she raised this incident alleged to have happened much earlier on 09-12-2018. Thus, there is a delay of more than ten months in raising a complaint with regard to the alleged incident.
Further, the Court noted that the said occurrence happened in a foreign country. Therefore, Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) was attracted, which makes it mandatory to obtain sanction of the Central Government for prosecuting offences committed outside India. However, in the present case such sanction of the Central Government is not seen obtained, though it becomes relevant at the stage of taking cognizance.
The Court reiterated that the test of obscenity under Section 294(b) of the IPC is whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences.
After taking note of N.S.Madhanagopal v. K.Lalitha, (2022) 17 SCC 818, the Court held that even if the case of the de actress regarding the incident alleged to have happened in Dubai is assumed as correct, the offence under Section 294(b) is also not made out against Sreekumar, as the word used may be defamatory and it might have hurt her; however, that is not sufficient to constitute the offence under Section 294(b).
Concerning the offence under Section 509 IPC, the Court after examining the ingredients that constitute the said offence, remarked that Mere utterances of unpleasant or abusive words without an intention either to insult the modesty of the women or to intrude upon the privacy of such women would not attract the offence under Section 509 of the IPC.
The Court noted that the actress alleged that the Sreekumar, through Facebook and over phone, abused her in a manner causing disrepute to her and outraged her modesty.
The Court held that the accusations are not sufficient to constitute the offence under Section 509 of IPC against Sreekumar.
Moreover, regarding the remaining offence under Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act, the Court noted that the said offence is non cognizable. When all other offences alleged in the final report are found unsustainable, prosecution solely for the offence under Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act would not survive as permission required under law was not available.
[Sreekumar Menon v. State of Kerala, 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 6355, decided on 04-11-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Petitioner: S.Rajeev K.K.Dheerendrakrishnan , V.Vinay, D.Feroze, Anand Kalyanakrishnan
For Respondents: Public Prosecutor Nima Jacob
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
