Anticipatory bail eligibility requires balancing personal liberty against grave allegations of sexual harassment, emphasizing the need for thorough investigations without interference.

ORDER :

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

Petitioners have filed this application seeking anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

2. Petitioners are accused 1 to 4 in Crime No.235 of 2025 of Infopark Police Station, Ernakulam, registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 79, 74, 75 r/w Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, the offence under Section 64 of BNS has also been incorporated.

3. The prosecution alleges that the first accused subjected the defacto complainant to sexual exploitation while accused 2 to 4 threatened the defacto complainant over phone, intimidating her that she will be trapped in a case and even murder her, if she complains against the first accused and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. The first petitioner is a businessman while the remaining petitioners are his employees and Director working in the same establishment. Petitioners have pleaded that the first petitioner has been receiving threatening calls from the husband of the defacto complainant alleging illicit relationship between him and the defacto complainant and also that he would physically harm him. It is alleged that after the defacto complainant and her husband started raising false allegations and demands, an internal meeting was arranged with the fourth accused and accordingly a meeting was arranged on 24-07-2025 at a hotel at Ernakulam. It is alleged that during the meeting the defacto complainant and her husband made a demand of Rs.30 crores as compensation and granted two days for compliance. On 26-07-2025, the fourth petitioner again met the defacto complainant and her husband and as the latter remained unyielding in their demands, it was agreed to pay Rs.30 crores as demanded. An amount of Rs. 50,000/- was transferred to the account of the defacto complainant on 28-07-2025 and thereafter, the first accused got a crime registered for extortion against the defacto complainant and her husband. After informing the police, the fourth accused met the defacto complainant and her husband at the hotel on 29-07-2025 and the policemen who were in plain clothes arrested the defacto complainant and her husband immediately after they accepted two cheques for Rs.10 crores each along with the agreement allegedly prepared and brought by them. After the Chief Judicial Magistrate released the defacto complainant and her husband on bail, they have falsely registered the present crime. It is stated that the first petitioner is an international figure whose professional standing and establishment had acquired great fame and if his professional and personal integrity is attacked without any basis and if he is taken into custody, it will seriously prejudice his establishment which engages more than 1000 employees. Thus, it was prayed that anticipatory bail be granted to the accused.

5. The defacto complainant who had impleaded herself filed an objection, pointing out that she had joined as Executive Assistant to the first accused on 13.02.2024. She referred to the episodes of sexual harassment which started within three months of her joining the company and also specifically mentioned that the accused indulged in perverted acts and though she resisted the same, due to her financial condition and the requirement to meet the expenses as a single parent, fearing termination of her employment, she could not initially raise any complaints. She refers to the first accused sending her videos of him masturbating while repeating her name. She also mentioned that she had submitted resignations on four occasions commencing from 15.06.2024, until July 2025 apart from giving written complaints to the Internal Complaints Committee of the company. However, all her resignation letters were rejected threatening that an adverse background report would be given to the prospective employers. Even the comp