Kerala High Court
Chithra Surendran vs The State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2020
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E)
AGAINST CC NO.1119/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,
PATHANAMTHITTA
CRIME NO.1486/2017 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:
1 CHITHRA SURENDRAN
AGED 22 YEARS, D/O.LATE SURENDRAN,
PONVELIPARAMBIL VEETIL, ELANTHOOR EAST P.O.,
ELANTHUR VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689643.
2 AJITHA SURENDRAN,
AGED 48 YEARS, W/O.LATE SURENDRAN,
PONVELIPARAMBIL VEETIL, ELANTHOOR EAST P.O.,
ELANTHUR VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689643.
BY ADVS.
SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
SRI.M.KIRANLAL
SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
SRI.T.S.SARATH
SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR
RESPONDENTS/STATE, INVESTIGATING OFFICER & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689645.
3 GEETHA,
AGED 42 YEARS, W/O.MANOJ, PONVELIPARAMBIL VEETIL,
ELANTHOOR EAST P.O., ELANTHUR VILLAGE,
KOZHENCHERY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689643.
R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR
R1 & 2 BY SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E) 2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
-------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.5006 of 2020
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of December, 2020
ORDER
The prayers in the aforecaptioned Criminal Miscellaneous case filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) are as follows:-
"1. To quash Annexure A1 FIR and Annexure A2 Final Report filed against the petitioners/accused no.1 & 2 in Crime no.1486/2017 of Police Station of Pathanamthitta, Pahanamthitta District which is now pending as C.C. No.1119/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Pathanamthitta and all further proceedings there from.
2. Issue such other orders or directions which deems necessary for the ends of justice and in the circumstances of the case."
2. Heard Sri.Manu Ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners (A1 & A2), Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for 1st & 2nd respondents and Sri.M.T.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondent No.3 (lady de facto complainant).
3. The case set up by the petitioners in the Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E) 3 abovecaptioned criminal miscellaneous case is broadly as follows:-
That the petitioners/accused no.1 & 2 are respectively daughter and mother and the de-facto complainant is the wife of CW3 in Annexure A2 final report, who is the brother of accused No.2's husband. They are accused in Annexure A2 final report in crime no.1486/2017 of Pathanamthitta Police Station, Pathanamthitta District, which is now pending as C.C. No.1119/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Pathanamthitta, registered for the offences punishable under Sec.509 of IPC and Sec.119(b) of Kerala Police Act, 2011. As per the allegation levelled in the FIS, on 05.04.2017 at a time before 12.15pm. The de-facto complainant while working outside in the courtyard of her residence wearing an unclean and dirty dress was video-graphed by the 1st petitioner/accused no.1 which was shared by her to the 2nd petitioner/accused no.2 who uploaded the same in Face-
Book (Social Media) platform at 12.15pm on 05.04.2017, which has caused disgrace and mental pain to the de-facto complainant. After investigation the 2nd respondent submitted the final report affirming the accusation but finding that the place on which the de-facto complainant has been working was not the courtyard but the side of the public road. The petitioners approaches this Court on explicit ground among others that, no violation of privacy of a woman is possible if someone captures by way of video or photo and publishes any act done by that woman in a public space which is otherwise open and conspicuous to anyone in the general public. The capturing and publishing of the video or photo will not be violation of the privacy especially when the act of the woman so recorded is against the law and hence the prosecution will be nothing but abuse of process. Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E) 4
4. The contentions urged by the petitioners are as follows:-
"a. No violation of privacy of a woman is possible if someone captures by way of video or photo and publishes any act done by that woman in a public space which is otherwise open and conspicuous to anyone in the general public. The capturing and publishing of the video or photo will not be violation of the privacy especially when the act of the woman so recorded is against the law.
b. Careful scrutiny of the allegations would not show that the de-facto complainant has not stated that the videographing or its publication has violated her privacy or caused to outrage the modesty as a woman but only states that the same has caused insult and mental pain. Hence the offences alleged or no offences are attracted in the present case.
It is in the light of these averments and contentions that the petitioners have filed the instant criminal miscellaneous case with the aforementioned prayers.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would place reliance on decisions of this Court as in Abdullah Rizwan P.A. & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr. [2018(3) KHC 778], Basheer v. State of Kerala [2014 KHC 5026] to buttress the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners.
6. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the ends of justice would be advanced as at Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E) 5 present by giving liberty of the petitioners to move requisite application for discharge through their learned counsel before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta, who is dealing with the instant Calendar Case, C.C. No.1119/2017.
7. The petitioners are given liberty to file discharge application through their learned counsel, who may enter appearance before the learned Magistrate by filing appropriate memo of appearance and such discharge application shall be filed without any further delay along with a certified copy of this judgment.
8. On filing of such application for discharge, without further delay, the learned Magistrate will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioners' counsel, the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned Advocate appearing for the 3rd respondent (lady de-facto complainant) and then shall consider the merits of such application for discharge and should pass orders thereon without much delay, preferably within a period of 6 weeks from the date of filing of such application along with a certified copy of this order. All contentions available to the petitioners are left open to be raised Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E) 6 and decided subject to the condition that charges should not have been framed by the learned Magistrate as on the date of filing of such discharge application. After the learned Magistrate passes orders on the discharge application, if the party concerned has any legally justiciable grievances thereto, liberty is accorded to workout the remedies, in the manner known to law.
With these observations and directions and with the said liberty, the above criminal miscellaneous case will stand disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE Skk//16122020 Crl.MC.No.5006 OF 2020(E) 7 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1486/2017 OF POLICE STATION OF PATHANAMTHITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1486/2017 OF POLICE STATION OF PATHANAMTHITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT WHICH IS PENDING AS C.C.NO.1119 OF 2017 ON THE FILES OF JFMC-I, PATHANAMTHITTA.
ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF THE FACEBOOK POST OF THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2.
ANNEXURE A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REPLY VIDE NO.474/2017 OBTAINED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 FROM THE ASST.ENGINEER, PWD(ROADS), SUB-
DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA DATED 06.06.2017 ALONG WITH APPLICATION.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL