Supreme Court grants anticipatory bail to Malayalam actor Siddique in rape case

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted anticipatory bail to Malayalam actor Siddique in the rape case lodged against him [Siddique v State of Kerala and anr].

A Bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma confirmed the interim anticipatory bail earlier granted to the cine actor.

The hearing today saw Justice Trivedi again question why the complainant had taken eight years to file a police complaint, when the crime is alleged to have taken place in 2016.

"You had the courage to post on Facebook but not go to police station?" Justice Trivedi asked.

This aspect was reflected in the order passed as well.

"Considering the fact that the complainant had lodged the complaint almost 8 years after the alleged incident in 2016 and she had also posted the post on Facebook somewhere in 2018 making allegations about 14 people including the appellant with regard to alleged sexual abuse meted out, and as also the fact that she had not gone to the Hema Committee to ventilate her grievance which was set up by the High Court of Kerala ... We are inclined to accept the present appeal subject to conditions. In that view of the matter, in event of the arrest of appellant he shall be released on bail subject to terms of trial court including the surrender of passport to IO," the Court said.

The Bench was hearing a plea by Siddique against an order passed by the Kerala High Court on September 24 rejecting bail to him.

The top court had earlier granted him interim protection from arrest, and in the last hearing asked why it took eight years for the rape survivor to lodge a complaint against the Malayalam cine actor.

The allegations against Siddique were made after the public release of the Justice K Hema Committee Report on August 19 this year. The report revealed large-scale sexual abuse, 'casting couch' practices, and entrenched gender discrimination in the Malayalam film industry.

The publication of the redacted report has led to a wave of sexual abuse allegations against several actors, directors and other film personalities.

The case against Siddique was registered based on a complaint by an actress who accused him of raping her at the Mascot Hotel in Thiruvananthapuram in 2016.

The investigation into this case is being handled by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) set up to probe the sexual abuse cases emerging after the publication of the Justice Hema Committee report.

During the hearing of the matter today before the apex court, the complainant's counsel, Advocate Vrinda Grover replied that her (complainant's) posts on social media were an attempt to speak out about the incident. Even then, she (complainant) faced immense backlash from Siddique's followers, Grover said.

It was only with the publication of the Hema Committee report in August this year and the Kerala High Court's intervention on matters arising out of the report that the survivor found the courage to file a complaint, the counsel added.

"Why was she silent? You can see through the FB posts an attempt to talk about it. And there is a backlash on social media through his followers. It is only after the Hema committee report and the Kerala High Court (taking notice) ... it is only when she feels there is an authority that will listen, she came forward ... The trial will suffer if he (Siddique) is not interrogated!" Grover argued.

Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Siddique, said that the rape complainant has made similar allegations against "all and sundry".

"Her complaints of rape are against all and sundry! Is it possible? See her Facebook posts. How reputations are tarnished!" he contended.

"Matter of concern for all of us. No one is spared," Justice Trivedi remarked.

"Yes. Nobody will be spared," Rohatgi replied.

Rohatgi went on to assert that Siddique was not guilty of any wrongdoing and that the complainant's allegations were suspect.

"I never met her before the preview, where she came with her parents. But she says I said 'come meet me alone in hotel.' 'Verbal assault' become 'rape' and what not," he said.

Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar represented the State of Kerala and asserted that Siddique is not cooperating with the authorities.

After the Court granted anticipatory bail, Kumar proceeded to urge the Court to direct that the Public Prosecutor must be heard before bail conditions are set by the trial court.

The Supreme Court, however, rejected the request.

"We are not saying anything (on that). We do not know the practice there and have not said it in other orders. This is not a special law. We will not make any exception in this case. Why should we mention something we normally do not?" the Court asked.

[Read Live Coverage]