Back
Grants To Advocate Accused Of Sexually Harassing Woman Lawyer
In a notable decision, the granted to an advocate accused of sexually harassing a fellow woman lawyer inside a court hall at Palakkad. Justice Dr. Kauser Edappagath, presiding over the bail application, held that was unnecessary given the nature of the allegations and the existence of a filed by the accused against the complainant.
The Incident and the FIR
The alleged incident occurred on , at the . The , also a lawyer, claimed that the accused, , pressed her buttocks with sexual intent as she was moving out of the court hall to write a petition. Based on her complaint, Crime No.942/2026 was registered at the under , which penalizes sexual harassment. Notably, a separate crime (No.941/2026) had already been registered at the instance of the accused against the complainant and others.
Arguments and Court's Reasoning
Counsel for the petitioner, , argued that the accused was innocent and falsely implicated, with no material on record connecting him to the alleged crime. Senior Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, contending that the incident was part of the accused's intentional criminal acts and that his release would hamper the investigation.
The court examined the case diary and noted that both parties are practicing lawyers at the Palakkad Court Centre. It also observed that a existed — a crime registered at the accused's instance against the . Given these circumstances, the court found unnecessary.
Key Observations
The court stated:
"The applicant and the defacto complainant are lawyers. Annexure 2 would show that at the instance of the applicant, a crime was registered against the defacto complainant and others. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his
seems unnecessary."
It further added:
"For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant
to the applicant."
Bail Conditions
The court allowed the bail application subject to several conditions. The applicant must execute a bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two . He must fully cooperate with the investigation, including submitting to for discovery if required. He is required to appear before the investigating officer every Saturday between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. until further orders. Additionally, he must not commit any offence of a like nature, refrain from contacting or influencing prosecution witnesses, and cannot leave the State of Kerala without the trial court's permission.
The order ensures that the accused is released in the event of his arrest, while the investigation proceeds with his cooperation.
