The Karnataka High Court Today (July 4) dismissed a 2012 unnatural sex case against Malayalam filmmaker Ranjith Balakrishnan. The court found major factual errors and an unexplained 12-year delay in the complaint.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Bengaluru: In a big relief for Malayalam filmmaker Ranjith Balakrishnan, the Karnataka High Court on Friday cancelled a 2012 case where he was accused of unnatural sex by an aspiring male actor.
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar heard the petition filed by Ranjith and agreed to close the case completely.
The complaint was made by a struggling actor, who said that Ranjith forced him into unnatural sexual acts in 2012 at the Taj Hotel near Bengaluru International Airport. He claimed that he was called to the fourth floor of the hotel for a meeting, where the alleged incident happened.
However, Senior Advocate Prabhuling Navadgi, who appeared for Ranjith, told the court that the entire case was fake. He highlighted an important fact: the Taj Hotel near the airport was not even open in 2012—it was launched in 2016.
This clear timeline error made the court question the truthfulness of the allegations.
This major factual mistake had earlier led another High Court judge, Justice M. Nagaprasanna, to stay the legal process against the filmmaker. That judge had also said that the 12-year delay in filing the complaint was not explained properly. The long delay made the case look suspicious and raised doubts about the complainant’s intention.
Ranjith Balakrishnan was earlier charged under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with unnatural offences, and also under Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, related to privacy violations.
The filmmaker approached the High Court with a request to cancel the FIR (First Information Report).
Finally, the court found no strong reason to continue the case and cancelled all proceedings.
Advocate Joseph Anthony filed the petition.
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) criminalized “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” with any man, woman, or animal. This broadly included consensual sexual acts between same-sex individuals, which were deemed “unnatural offenses”. While the section was partially struck down in 2018, it still applies to non-consensual acts and sexual acts on animals.
Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000, in India, deals with the punishment for violation of privacy through the capture, publication, or transmission of images of a private area of any person without their consent, under circumstances violating their privacy. It essentially criminalizes voyeurism and other forms of privacy invasion using electronic means.
CASE TITLE:
Ranjith Balkrishnan vs State of Karnataka
WP 32231/2024
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Karnataka High Court
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Unnatural Sex
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
