The survivor in a rape case against MLA Rahul Mamkootathil has moved the Supreme Court of India challenging anticipatory bail granted by the Kerala High Court after allegations of rape, forced abortion, and pregnancy from sexual assault.
NEW DELHI: The survivor in the first of three rape cases filed against Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) and former Congress leader Rahul Mamkootathil has appealed to the Supreme Court to challenge a Kerala High Court decision that granted him anticipatory bail in the case.
The rape allegation emerged following a written complaint submitted by the survivor and her family to Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on November 27, 2025. The complaint accused the MLA of rape, causing pregnancy through sexual assault, and forcing her into an abortion.
Additionally, the survivor claimed that Mamkootathil recorded intimate videos of them without her consent and threatened to share these videos unless she complied with his demands.
ALSO READ: Kerala Govt Challenges Anticipatory Bail to MLA Rahul Mamkootathil in Second Rape Case
On February 12, a single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court, presided over by Justice Kauser Edappagath, granted anticipatory bail to Mamkootathil.
In her petition contesting this decision, the survivor argued that the MLA’s conduct clearly fits the definition of ‘rape’ under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). She also objected to certain remarks made by the High Court, which suggested a consensual relationship between her and Mamkootathil, particularly noting her repeated visits to him.
The survivor maintained that these comments were inappropriate and insufficient justification for granting anticipatory bail, alleging that they amounted to an attack on her character.
She stated,
“The Hon’ble High Court erred to appreciate that no person has the right to sexually assault the victim for the reason that she voluntarily came to his room. Only because the victim had known the accused or that she was in cordial relations with him will not make her responsible for the sexual assault.”
Furthermore, she contended that past relationships or consensual sexual activity do not imply ongoing consent. She also argued that forcing her to take medication for an abortion under threats of suicide falls under Section 69 of the BNS, which penalizes causing a miscarriage without a woman’s consent.
In her plea, the survivor accused Mamkootathil of preying on vulnerable women in distressed situations, troubled marriages, or separations. She highlighted that three rape cases have now been filed against him and that authorities have identified nearly ten victims, including one minor.
She pointed out that the High Court did not adequately consider Mamkootathil’s continuing position of power and influence. According to her, he has garnered a substantial fanbase that has engaged in cyberbullying and threatened her, citing individuals like Rahul Easwar, advocate Deepa Joseph, and Sandeep Warrier as among those instigating harassment. Easwar previously served over a week in jail for disclosing the survivor’s identity.
Arguing that there is a clear prima facie case against Mamkootathil, the survivor has requested that the Supreme Court overturn the High Court’s order granting him anticipatory bail.
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE
