Mani C. Kappan. File
| Photo Credit: H. Vibhu

Justice Devan Ramachandran made these observations while reviewing a plea against visual pollution in the form of flex boards, banners, and other unauthorised installations. File.
| Photo Credit: The Hindu

The Kerala High Court holds that that it was essential for the authority to specify the reason for denial in every order, as it was an “indispensable part of a sound judicial system.”
| Photo Credit: R K Nithin

Image for representation.

File photo of elephants at Punnathur Anakotta in Guruvayur. 

Kochi:

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday granted anticipatory bail to veteran actor-cum-director Balachandra Menon in a case accusing him of outraging the modesty of a female actor in 2007 during a film shoot, saying that men too have “pride and dignity” and not just women.

The order and observation by Justice PV Kunhikrishnan came while allowing the anticipatory bail plea moved by the actor against whom the case was lodged in September this year after the release of the Justice Hema Committee report.

In his plea, Mr Menon had contended that the complaint was made after a gap of 17 years from the date of the alleged incident in 2007 and the intention was to malign his image.

The court said there was “force” in his arguments as it was an admitted fact that the alleged incident happened in 2007.

“It is an admitted fact that the victim filed the complaint after 17 years of the alleged incident. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner (Mr Menon) is a known cine artist. He directed about 40 films and he obtained two National Awards. He was honoured by the nation by giving Padma Shri also.

“Based on the statement of a lady, that also after 17 years, the present case is registered. It is true that the investigation is going on. But, everybody must remember that the pride and dignity is not only to women, but to men also. I leave it there,” Justice Kunhikrishnan said.

The court further said that it was a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner “in the interest of justice”.

It directed Mr Menon to appear before the investigating officer within two weeks from Wednesday to undergo interrogation.

“After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer (IO) proposes to arrest the petitioner (Mr Menon), he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer concerned,” the court said.

It further directed that Mr Menon shall appear before the IO for interrogation as and when required, shall cooperate with the investigation and “shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer”.

The complainant had made the allegations against Mr Menon in the wake of the Justice Hema Committee’s report being released.

Based on the complaint, an FIR under sections 354 (assault of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC was registered against Mr Menon.

The actor was given interim protection from arrest by the court on October 30 and it was extended from time to time till Wednesday when his plea was allowed.

The Justice Hema Committee was constituted by the Kerala government after the 2017 actress assault case.

The complete report of the committee was placed before the Kerala High Court which directed that it be handed over to the special investigation team (SIT) that was constituted to probe complaints of sexual abuse in the film industry.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Kochi:

In a setback for the Left government in Kerala, the High Court here has said that waving of black flags at the Chief Minister’s convoy was not an illegal act and does not amount to defamation.

The ruling by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas assumes significance as many Youth Congress activists faced police action for waving black flags at Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan during the Nava Kerala Sadas, the state government’s outreach programme, last year.

“Though signs and visible representations can be a mode of defaming a person, still, showing or waving a black flag to a person cannot amount to defamation nor is it an illegal act,” Justice Thomas said.

The ruling came while quashing the final report against three persons for waving black flags at Mr Vijayan’s convoy in 2017 as it passed through North Paravur near here.

The court said that, generally, a black flag is shown as a mark of protest and as long as there is no law which prohibits it, such conduct cannot attract the offence of defamation.

It further said that in the instant case, the offence of defamation was alleged and cognisance was taken on the basis of a police report which were without any legal validity as such action can be initiated only on the basis of a private complaint.

The court further noted that a reading of the final report indicated that “no obstruction was caused to the Chief Minister’s convoy even temporarily, as the police party had blocked and removed the protesters immediately”.

“There is, hence, nothing to indicate that any obstruction was caused by the petitioners even temporarily to any person. Thus, the offence under section 283 (danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation) of IPC is not attracted from the allegations in the final report,” it said in its order of November 20.

The court also noted that according to the final report, when the accused were protesting, the police prevented them from obstructing the Chief Minsiter’s convoy, and in that process, the accused allegedly pushed and pulled at the officers’ uniform.

“Minimal push and pull is only natural while preventing a person from causing obstructions. The allegations do not indicate any obstruction caused in the discharge of the police duty. The allegations in the final report only indicate a trivial instance of push and pull by the petitioners.

“… this court is of the view that having regard to the nature of allegations and in the absence of any assault or injury on the police officers and since the duty of the police officers was not deterred, section 95 (act causing slight harm) IPC can be applied to quash the offence under section 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty) IPC,” the court said.

The petitioners were booked for the offences under sections 283, 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant), 500 (defamation) and 353 of the IPC for waving black flags at the Chief Minsiter’s convoy in 2017.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Kochi:

A mother’s right to breastfeed and that of a baby to be breastfed are facets of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Kerala High Court said on Friday while quashing an order of a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) handing over custody of a breastfeeding infant to the father.

The CWC had handed over custody of the baby to the father as it was of the view that the infant would not be safe with its mother as she had eloped with her father-in-law.

Quashing the CWC’s decision and directing that the child be handed over to the mother, Justice V G Arun said the committee’s order reflects only the “moral bias” of its members.

The court further said that the CWC found the mother unfit “based on the predilections of its members”.

“The one and only concern of the committee should be the best interest of the child. That the mother of the child has chosen to live with a person other than her husband is not the committee’s concern.” “Judged by the moral standards of the members, the petitioner (mother) may not be a good person, but that does not make her a bad mother. Personal moral values always result in biased judgments. Unfortunately, the order reflects nothing other than the moral bias of the committee members,” the court said.

The court also expressed surprise that the CWC did not take into account the fact that the infant was being breastfed “while hastily granting custody of the child to the 3rd respondent(father)”.

“The counsel for the petitioner is correct in her submission that, severance of a one year and four month old baby from its mother violates her right to breastfeed the baby and that of the baby to be breastfed, such right being a facet of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution,” the court said.

It also termed as “disheartening” the outcome of the CWC order which resulted in the infant being separated from its mother for almost a month, “denying it the care, comfort and love which is most crucial at this stage”.

The court also observed that the committee’s role would arise only when both parents of a child are not in a position to take care of him or her.

“The CWC having failed to consider these crucial factors, the impugned order cannot withstand the scrutiny of law.” “… the impugned order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, thereby impinging upon the fundamental rights of the petitioner as well as the child,” the court said.

The order came on the mother’s plea, filed through advocate Bhanu Thilak, seeking custody of the infant and challenging the CWC order.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Kolkata:

The Kerala High Court has held that having sexual intercourse or exhibiting a naked body before a minor amounts to sexual harassment of the child and is punishable under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The ruling by Justice A Badharudeen came on a plea by a man seeking quashing of the case against him for various offences under the IPC, POCSO Act and the Juvenile Justice Act.

The man was accused of having sexual intercourse with the minor’s mother in a lodge without locking the room and then beating up the boy, who saw the act, for questioning the same.

The accused-petitioner, in his plea, claimed that none of the offences were made out against him.

The High Court held that when a person exhibits a naked body to a child, the same is an act intending to commit sexual harassment upon a child.

Therefore, the offence punishable under sections 11(i) (sexual harassment) read with 12 (punishment for sexual harassment) of the POCSO Act would be attracted.

“In this case, the allegation is that the accused persons engaged in sexual intercourse after being naked, even without locking the room and allowed the entry of the minor in the room, so that the minor could see the same.

“Thus, prima facie, the allegation as to commission of offence punishable under sections 11(i) read with 12 of the POCSO Act, as against the petitioner (accused man) in this case is made out,” the High Court said.

It also said that since the man allegedly beat up the child and the minor’s mother did not try to stop the same, therefore, the offences under sections 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) and 34 (common intention) were also attracted.

The HC directed that the man face trial for the offences under the POCSO Act and sections 323 and 34 of the IPC.

It, however, partly allowed his plea and quashed the criminal proceedings against him for the offences under section 294(b) (sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place) and 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint) of the IPC and section 75 of the JJ Act, saying that those offences were not made out.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Kochi:

The Kerala High Court, hearing a suo-moto case on the Wayanad landslide disaster, on Friday stressed the need for a holistic approach in pursuing developmental activities, so tragedies like that which took place in the hill district could be averted.

It then appointed senior advocate Ranjith Thampan as amicus curiae and asked him to look into present policies and to suggest fresh ones on environmental issues.

The court pointed out that a landslide is a classic example of what happens when the natural environment’s balance is disrupted.

“When you are talking about the availability of a resource and you remove such things from nature, the ecological balance is disturbed. Landslide is a classic example. You create pockets of holes which then lead to such incidents. A holistic approach is very much needed to check the social, economic, and ecological impact of such activities,” it said.

The court asked the amicus curiae to do an in-depth analysis on how the environment can be protected and asked the state government to develop a comprehensive policy on developmental activities.

It also impleaded agencies including the National Centre for Earth Science Studies, the Geological Survey of India, the Union of India, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Kerala State Disaster Management, the State Environmental Impact Assessment, and the Coastal Zone Management Authority, and posted the next hearing for August 16.

Meanwhile, the over 1,000-strong rescue team comprising personnel from all the defence forces, the NDRF, the SDRF, police, fire service and volunteers began searches early on Friday morning in the four worst-affected areas of Churalmala, Velarimala, Mundakayil, and Punchirimadom. The death toll has touched 413 while 152 people are still missing.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is arriving on Saturday to visit the affected areas and will also interact with the victims presently housed in relief camps.

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)