Kerala HC acquits former Minister A. Neelalohitadasan Nadar in case pertaining to outraging modesty of woman officer

The Kerala High Court on Monday acquitted former Minister for Transport and Forests A. Neelalohitadasan Nadar of the charge of outraging the modesty of a woman Indian Forest Service (IFS) official who was serving as the Divisional Forest Officer, Kozhikode, 1999.

A Bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath said that although the incident allegedly occurred on February 27, 1999, at the Government Guest House in Kozhikode, the FIR was registered only on May 9, 2001, based on a complaint by the officer to the Director General of Police on March 25, 2001. There was a delay of more than two years in preferring the complaint and registering the FIR. Her explanation was that she was afraid to make a complaint against the petitioner, as he was the Minister of her own department. The petitioner resigned as Minister on February 12, 2000, and she gave a statement regarding the alleged incident on May 3. The complaint was lodged almost 10 months later.

2005 judgment

Mr. Nadar had filed a criminal revision petition before the High Court, challenging a 2005 judgment of the Kozhikode Sessions Court sentencing him to three months’ simple imprisonment.

Mr. Nadar contended that he was convicted based solely on the testimony of the ‘victim’ which cannot be legally sustained since it did not satisfy the test laid down by the Supreme Court for qualifying as a testimony of ‘sterling quality’. Moreover, the delay of over two years in lodging the complaint, has not been suitably explained, he said, and alleged that the case was falsely constructed by the forest mafia due to their hostility towards him, with assistance from the victim.

Prosecution’s stance

Countering this, the senior public prosecutor said the reason for the delay has been explained, while the prosecution successfully established the essential elements of Section 354 of the IPC (assault or criminal force on a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty). On the day of the alleged crime, the officer informed her mother and her close friend over phone and reported the matter to the then Commissioner of Police, Kozhikode, in person the next day.

The court said that the only witnesses the prosecution relied upon are her mother and best friend. One also needs to examine whether the officer fell within the category of ‘wholly reliable witness’ and whether her testimony would qualify to be that of a ‘sterling character,’ to form the sole basis of the petitioner’s conviction.

There is no satisfactory explanation for the delay in registering the FIR. There is absolutely no reason for her, an educated, high-profile officer, not to prefer a complaint at least immediately after she gave a statement.

Her version of the incident testified in court has no correlation with her police statement. The said version also does not match the accounts of other prosecution witnesses. Hence, she cannot be regarded as a ‘sterling witness’, whose testimony can be accepted without corroboration, the court said, and absolved the petitioner.