Kerala High Court quashes case against cop who made remarks against Walayar rape victims

The Kerala High Court recently quashed a criminal case lodged against Superintendent of Police (SP) MJ Sojan who was booked for making derogatory comments against the deceased minor victims in the Walayar rape case [MJ Sojan v State of Kerala & anr]..Justice A Badharudeen noted that the remarks in question were recorded by a journalist from 24 News channel as part of investigative journalism and that SP Sojan did not know that the remark would be telecast by the media channel.The complaint did not indicate that Sojan intentionally made the comments with the knowledge that they would be shared publicly or aired on the TV news channel, the Court found. Therefore, the Court held that Sojan could not be held liable for the offence under Section 23 (making media statements without complete or authentic information, or statements that may lower the dignity of child victims) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act)."It is held that prosecution materials do not support that the petitioner herein (SP Sojan) divulged anything knowing that the same was intended to be published or telecasted through media so as to attract offence under Section 23(1) of POCSO Act," the Court said. The Court, however, said that it is open to the complainant to file a criminal case against the media channel (24 News) and the reporter who recorded Sojan's statement for a violation of Section 23 of POCSO Act."Disposal of this petition will not stand as a rider for the complainant to move against CW1 and the channel in accordance with law," the Court said. .Sojan, who investigated the deaths of two minor girls in the Walayar rape case, had allegedly made derogatory comments during a conversation with a reporter from 24 News Channel.The statements were later aired, leading to accusations under the POCSO Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.The mother of the victims had filed a private complaint before the Palakkad special court, alleging that Sojan had victimised her daughters by making false statements about them during his investigation. These statements suggested that the minors had consented to sexual intercourse which deeply hurt the family’s dignity..The Court observed that the derogatory statements, while harmful, were part of a private conversation between Sojan and Shanoob Meerasahib, the reporter. The reporter recorded the conversation without Sojan’s knowledge and provided it to the channel, which telecast the remarks. Since there was no intent on Sojan’s part to divulge the information to the media for publication, the Court found that the charges under Section 23(1) of the POCSO Act were not applicable to him.The Court noted that it was not Sojan but the reporter and others at the channel who were responsible for telecasting the remarks without verifying their authenticity or impact."Thus it is perceivable that 24 News Channel telecasted report and comments against the victims of rape which have the effect of lowering the reputation of the children/victims without an authentic information," the Court stated.It also added that there seemed to be selective prosecution since the complaint did not include the media personnel who broadcast and publicised the information..The Court quashed the complaint and the proceedings initiated against Sojan, while directing the High Court registry to forward a copy of the order to the Director General of Police to consider initiating an investigation against the reporter and other media officials."Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Director General of Police, Thiruvananthapuram for considering investigation as against CW1 and others, as per law, in view of the facts of the case discussed herein above, if found necessary," the Court directed..The petitioner was represented by advocates Thomas J Anakkalunkal, Jayaraman S, Nirmal Cheriyan Varghese, Litty Peter, Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth, Dhanya Sunny and Ann Milka George.Senior Public Prosecutor Renjit George appeared for the state.Advocate PV Jeevesh appeared for the complainant..[Read Order]