The Supreme Court exempted Kerala journalist Aravindan Manikoth from surrendering in a 2013 case where he was convicted under Section 354A IPC for making sexually coloured remarks through a political satire article. The Court noted that he had already paid the compensation and granted interim protection pending the State of Kerala’s response.
The Supreme Court of India has recently granted relief to Kerala-based journalist Aravindan Manikoth by exempting him from surrendering in a 2013 criminal case related to alleged sexually coloured remarks against a woman public representative.
The case is titled Aravindan Manikoth vs State of Kerala and concerns his conviction under Section 354A(1)(iv) of the Indian Penal Code.
The order was first passed on November 20 by Justice SVN Bhatti. The Court noted that Manikoth had already paid the compensation ordered by the trial court and that the sentence awarded to him was imprisonment only till the rising of the Court.
Later, on December 15, a Bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and SC Sharma issued notice to the respondent, the State of Kerala.
The Supreme Court clarified that the protection given to Manikoth would continue till the State files its reply. This means that he does not have to surrender or undergo the symbolic jail sentence until the matter is further considered.
Aravindan Manikoth is the Managing Editor of Latest, an evening daily newspaper published from Kasaragod district in Kerala.
He was convicted under Section 354A(1)(iv) IPC, which deals with making sexually coloured remarks. The case arose from the publication of a political satire column titled “CPI(M) kisses Hasina.”
The article, written by another journalist in 2013, used metaphorical and political language to criticise the functioning of the Kanhangad Municipality, which was then headed by Chairperson Haseena Thajudheen.
The column accused the local Communist Party of “publicly kissing” the municipal administration, a phrase used in a political sense to suggest closeness and favouritism.
However, the prosecution claimed that this expression was vulgar and insulting to a woman holding public office. Based on this allegation, the Hosdurg Police registered an FIR against Manikoth under Section 354A(1)(iv) IPC, stating that the publication had “outraged the modesty” of the municipal chairperson.
In 2019, the trial court found Manikoth guilty. The court observed that the words used in the article were of “such a vulgar nature” that they would offend the dignity of a woman. The trial court sentenced him to imprisonment till the rising of the court and ordered him to pay ₹50,000 as compensation to the complainant.
Manikoth challenged this decision, but the Sessions Court upheld the conviction. Later, the Kerala High Court also refused to interfere with the findings of the lower courts, stating that there was “no reason to interfere” with the assessment of evidence.
In August 2025, Justice G Girish of the Kerala High Court dismissed Manikoth’s revision petition. The High Court held that both the trial court and the appellate court had correctly appreciated the evidence on record. The court remarked that the publication had indeed “outraged the modesty” of the complainant and that the finding of guilt was “fully justified.”
Before the Supreme Court, Manikoth argued that he had not written the article and had no intention of making any personal or sexual remarks against the complainant. His counsel submitted that he was only performing his role as Managing Editor and that the article was political satire, not obscenity.
It was further argued that holding him criminally liable for editorial responsibility violated his fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
ALSO READ: Sexual Harassment Case Against Former WFI Chief: Court’s Verdict Expected on May 20
The petition placed before the Supreme Court highlighted the long twelve-year legal struggle, starting from the FIR registered in 2013 and ending with concurrent findings of guilt by three courts.
Although the Supreme Court has not stayed or set aside the conviction at this stage, it accepted the submission that Manikoth had already complied with the monetary penalty.
Taking note of the symbolic nature of the sentence, the Court granted him exemption from surrendering to serve the imprisonment till the rising of the court.
Aravindan Manikoth was represented before the Supreme Court by Advocate Sriram Parakkat.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Sexual Remarks
