Premium
This is an archive article published on August 29, 2022

Kerala judge behind ‘provocative dresses’ bail order moves HC against transfer

Transferred from the Kozhikode sessions court to a labour court, S Krishna Kumar says the fear of punitive action would hit judicial officers' morale and deter them from taking free and fair decisions.

The judge who referred to a sexual harrassment accuser's "provocative dresses" while granting bail to a writer-activist petitioned the Kerala High Court. (File Photo)The judge who referred to a sexual harrassment accuser's "provocative dresses" while granting bail to a writer-activist petitioned the Kerala High Court. (File Photo)

The judge who referred to a sexual harrassment accuser’s “provocative dresses” while granting bail to a writer-activist petitioned the Kerala High Court on Monday challenging his transfer from the Kozhikode sessions court.

S Krishna Kumar said in his petition that the fear of punitive action–he was appointed as the presiding officer at the Kollam labour court in the wake of his observations–would hit judicial officers’ morale and deter them from taking free and fair decisions.

It was on August 23 that high court registrar-general P Krishna Kumar issued the transfer list, which included the transfer of three other district-level judicial officers.

Story continues below this ad

The observations that the judge made while granting anticipatory bail to Civic Chandran in two sexual harassment cases sparked outrage, prompting the state government to appeal in the high court against the district court’s order.

While granting Chandran bail in the first case, the judge observed that offences under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act would not prima facie stand against the writer-activist as it “is highly unbelievable that he will touch the body of the victim fully knowing that she is member of the scheduled caste”.

In the second case, the judge observed that the charge of sexual harassment would not stand when the woman is wearing “sexually provocative” clothes. “In order to attract Section 354 A (sexual harassment), there must be physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures. There must be a demand or request for sexual favours. There must be a sexually coloured remark. The photographs produced with the anticipatory bail application by the accused reveal that the complainant herself is exposing to dresses which are sexually provocative. Section 354 A will not prima facie stand against the accused,” he said.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement