Back
Dismisses Review Plea Against of Ex-Kerala Minister Neelalohithadasan Nadar in 1999 Case
The has dismissed a filed by Prakriti Srivastava, the former forest officer who had accused former Kerala minister A. Neelalohithadasan Nadar of in 1999. A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta rejected the plea in chambers, closing the legal proceedings against Nadar.
A guest house incident from 1999
The case arose from an incident on , at the Kozhikode Government Guest House. The complainant, then serving as Divisional Forest Officer, alleged that Nadar, the then Forest Minister, grabbed her hand and pulled her towards him in a manner that she said outraged her modesty.
In , a trial court convicted Nadar under and sentenced him to one year of . A sessions court later affirmed the but reduced the sentence to three months.
High Court overturns
Nadar challenged the before the in a filed in . On , the High Court acquitted him, holding that the lower courts had failed to apply the correct to the complainant's testimony.
The High Court placed significant weight on the delay in filing the FIR, which was lodged more than two years after the alleged incident. It noted that while the complainant said she had feared acting against a sitting minister, she remained silent even after Nadar resigned in . The court found this prolonged delay unexplained and described it as "" to the prosecution's case.
No ground to interfere
Before the , argued on behalf of Srivastava that the High Court had erred in overturning the and that the delay in filing the FIR was sufficiently explained by the complainant's fear of a powerful minister.
The , however, was not persuaded. In its order dismissing the , the bench observed:
"Having heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and having gone through the materials on record, we find no good ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court."
The Court added that pending applications, if any, stood disposed of.
Final closure for Nadar
With the dismissal of the , the of Neelalohithadasan Nadar has attained finality. The case highlights the importance of a satisfactory explanation for delayed complaints in criminal cases, particularly those resting on the of the complainant. The 's refusal to intervene leaves intact the 's conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish the case .
