The Supreme Court praised the bravery of women who, despite facing significant personal and professional challenges, came forward to record their statements before the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in the Kerala film industry sexual abuse case. Acknowledging their courage, the Court highlighted the importance of supporting victims in their pursuit of justice.The Hema Committee report highlights the difficulties and challenges women face when reporting abuse.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court recognized the bravery of women who, despite facing major personal and professional repercussions, came forward to report sexual abuse in the Kerala film industry.
The Court emphasized, however, that investigating agencies must also respect the wishes of women who prefer to remain silent.
A three-judge Bench, consisting of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta, commended the victims and witnesses who shared their experiences with the Justice Hema Committee and later provided statements to a State-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), which resulted in over 25 First Information Reports (FIRs) being filed.
Justice Mehta noted,
“These women faced numerous challenges to come forward,”
Nonetheless, the Supreme Court clarified that the SIT could not arbitrarily register FIRs against women who, after speaking to the Justice Hema Committee, chose not to pursue criminal charges against their alleged assailants.
Addressing the State through senior advocate Ranjit Kumar and advocate Nishe Rajen Shonker, Justice Nath stated,
“How can you register a crime without evidence or witnesses willing to come forward? We are saying there’s no need to register a crime if the SIT finds no witnesses ready to provide statements. However, where witnesses do come forward, the crime must be registered and proceed according to the law,”
The case arose from a petition by film producer Sajimon Parayil, represented by senior advocate R. Basant and advocate A. Karthik. He argued that the Kerala High Court had directed the SIT to register FIRs based solely on statements made to the Justice Hema Committee, despite the witnesses expressing reluctance to pursue the matter.
The petition claimed that these witnesses and victims opposed any actions by the SIT based on their earlier statements.
Basant argued that the High Court’s order and the possibility of facing an SIT investigation should not be used to intimidate individuals, asserting,
“That would be a travesty of justice.”
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) and victims, stated that the Justice Hema Committee provided relief to many women who had long faced intimidation from powerful figures in the industry.
He noted that the WCC’s efforts to expose abuse led to the formation of the Justice Hema Committee, whose report was ignored for nearly seven years. Sankaranarayanan explained that victims often choose silence due to fears of losing their careers and the risk of being identified.
The Kerala State Women’s Commission, represented by advocate Parvathi Menon, accused Mr. Parayil of attempting to obstruct the investigation. The Commission contended that the High Court’s directives were consistent with the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). They emphasized that the High Court instructed the SIT to handle the investigation with the necessary sensitivity and to protect the victims’ privacy.
The Bench initially questioned Mr. Parayil’s standing, asking if his petition was effectively a PIL filed in anticipation of an FIR against himself.
The court has reserved its decision on the petition, with a ruling expected on January 27, 2025.