SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Ker) 639

SUNIL THOMAS
Aju Varghese – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Adv. Sri. C.P. Udayabhanu.
For the Respondents: Advs. Sri. P.S. Easwaran, Sri. P.U. Pratheesh Kumar.

ORDER :

1. This Crl. M.C is preferred by the sole accused in Crime No.1385 of 2017 of Kalamassery Police Station for offence punishable under section 228A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The factual matrix leading to the present case lies in a very narrow compass. According to the petitioner herein, he is an artist in the Malayalam film industry. The third respondent is a well known cine actress in the same industry. According to the prosecution, in February 2017, while the third respondent was proceeding to Ernakulam in her car, she was sexually assaulted by a group of persons in the vehicle, which led to the registration of Crime No.297 of 2017 of the Nedumbassery Police Station for offences punishable under sections 342, 366, 376, 506(i), 120(b) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 66E and 67A of IT Act. Petitioner posted a comment in his facebook account, inter alia, deprecating the act towards the actress and commenting that, it was a heinous act. He had disclosed the name of the victim in the above post. According to the petitioner, immediately on getting information that disclosing the identity of the victim was against the law, he immediately tendered an apology and removed her n












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top