Kerala High Court quashes stalking case filed by actress against film director

The Kerala High Court on Monday quashed a criminal case filed by an actress against film director Sreekumar Menon, finding that the allegations made by the actress did not constitute the cited offences of stalking, obscenity or intent to insult a woman's modesty [Sreekumar menon v State of Kerala & anr].

Justice S Manu added that the additional charge of Section 120 (o) (causing nuisance) of the Kerala Police Act would also not survive since the the permission required to prosecute Menon for the non-cognisable offence was not obtained.

The Court, therefore, allowed the filmmaker's plea to quash the case registered against him on the basis of the 2019 complaint filed by the actress.

The actress had claimed that Menon's ad agency earlier collaborated with her in connection with the activities of a charitable foundation run by her. The partnership contract was terminated after certain disagreements between the two parties.

The actress had also worked in a film directed by him. However, she alleged that because of the contract termination, the film director harboured a grudge and, therefore, acted indecently towards her and mentally harassed her, including during the release and promotional activities of the film. She claimed that he also harassed her associates and attempted to damage her goodwill.

The actress further said that she had entrusted Menon with signed blank documents and feared its potential misuse. She, therefore, also sought a return of these documents apart from restraining Menon from making remarks that were damaging to her reputation.

Based on her complaint, a first information report (FIR) was registered against Menon citing offences under Sections 354D (stalking), 294(b) (obscene acts and songs), and 509 (intent to insult a woman’s modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act (causing nuisance).

Menon challenged the criminal proceedings so initiated by filing a petition before the High Court. His counsel argued that the actress had filed the case only to harass him on account of the differences between them.

The State opposed Menon's plea, contending that from April 2018 onwards, Menon used to convey messages via Facebook and phone to defame her.

The State also referred to an incident that allegedly took place at the Dubai airport, when Menon allegedly made derogatory remarks against the actress in public view.

The Court, however, noted that the Dubai incident was not mentioned by the actress in her 2019 complaint to the police. It further observed that the actress never disclosed in her statements to the police that this incident had taken place much earlier, in 2018. The Court added that the incident, in any case, took place in a foreign jurisdiction.

As such, sanction from the Indian government would be required if a criminal case was to be initiated on the basis on such an event, which was not present in this case, the Court said.

The Court opined that even if that hurdle is crossed, the derogatory slur allegedly uttered by Menon at the airport did constitute an "obscene" act under Section 294, IPC.

"The word used may be defamatory and it might have hurt the de facto complainant; however, that is not sufficient to constitute the offence under Section 294(b)," the Court said.

The Court concluded that the remaining charges were also not made out against Menon.

The Court recounted that in the case of Jayaprakash PP v. Sheeba Rev, the High Court had already observed that threat or abuse by a man towards a woman who is at loggerheads with him would not attract the offence of stalking. Drawing an analogy to this case, the Court observed that Menon could not be accused of stalking the actress, given their earlier conflicts.

"Taking note of the issues between the petitioner and also the de facto complainant, it can never be said that the petitioner might have committed any acts that would fall within the true scope of the offence under Section 354D. Following a woman to abuse or threaten will not fall within the scope of the penal provision," the Court said.

The Court went on to conclude that Section 509 IPC would also not be attracted.

"Mere utterances of unpleasant or abusive words without an intention either to insult the modesty of the women or to intrude upon the privacy of such women would not attract the offence under Section 509 of the IPC," it observed.

The Court, therefore, allowed the petition and quashed the criminal proceedings against Menon.

Advocates S Rajeev, KK Dheerendrakrishnan, V Vinay, D Feroze, and Anand Kalyanakrishnan appeared for Sreekumar Menon.

Public Prosecutor Nima Jacob represented the State.

[Read Order]