Today, On 20th January, The Kerala High Court raised doubts about the POCSO case filed against journalists from Reporter TV. The Court observed that neither the minor girl involved nor her guardians had lodged any complaint. It assured that the journalists would be granted bail if arrested. The case has drawn attention to the role of media and legal procedures in such matters.
The Kerala High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to Arun Kumar K, an anchor at Malayalam news channel Reporter TV, and Shabas Ahmed S, the channel’s sub-editor (digital).
This decision was made in connection with a case involving the allegedly inappropriate illustration of a minor girl during a televised skit.
PV Kunhikrishnan issued the interim order and requested the State’s response to the bail plea.
The judge raised questions about the basis for filing charges against the journalists, noting,
“The victim has no complaint. Parents have no grievance. Is it for publicity?”
He further remarked,
“He (the accused) is a journalist; why should you trouble him? Prima facie, a case is made out by the petitioner. If arrested, he will be released on bail.”
Senior Advocate Vijay Bhanu represented the two journalists, who were charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The allegations stemmed from a mock skit aired by Reporter TV, which featured a minor girl participating in an Oppana (a traditional dance performed at Muslim weddings) competition.
In the skit, Shabas Ahmed interacted with the girl, who was dressed as the ‘manavatti’ (bride), and commented that she looked good while romantic music from the film Ustad Hotel played in the background. Following the broadcast, Arun Kumar hosted a segment on January 8 in which he asked Ahmed if he had met the minor girl again. When Ahmed replied negatively, Kumar suggested it was better for both parties not to see each other again.
These segments were subsequently removed from Reporter TV’s platforms. The State’s Department of Women and Child Development then filed a POCSO complaint against Kumar, Ahmed, and another staff member. The Cantonment police in Thiruvananthapuram registered the case under Sections 11(i) and 12 of the POCSO Act, as well as Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
In their bail application, Kumar and Ahmed argued that the skit was scripted and had been broadcast with the consent of the minor girl, her parents, and teachers. They maintained that the skit was purely for entertainment and intended to reflect the cultural spirit of the Youth Festival. The petition described the claims of sexual intent as unfounded, asserting that Kumar’s comments had been misinterpreted.
Kumar’s remarks, which were alleged to have a sexually suggestive connotation, were described in the petition as being manipulated.
Emphasizing that there was nothing in the conversation that would constitute an offense under the POCSO Act, the petition stated,
“This particular remark was deliberately manipulated and misinterpreted to give it a sexually suggestive connotation,”
The petitioners also claimed that the charges against them were politically motivated, citing Reporter TV’s critical coverage of major political parties. They argued that the allegations were baseless and part of an effort to damage the reputation of the news channel. The bail plea filed by Advocates PK Varghese, MT Sameer, Dhanesh V Madhavan, Jerry Mathew, Reghu Sreedharan, and Devika KR.
Case Title: Arun Kumar K & anr v. State of Kerala
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
