SC grants anticipatory bail to Malayalam actor Siddique in rape case

The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to Malayalam film actor Siddique in a rape case lodged by a young actress after having noted that the FIR in case was lodged in 2024 about eight years of the alleged incident in 2016.

A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma said having regard to the submissions made by the senior counsels for the parties and perusing the documents on record including the pleadings, "we deem it appropriate not to assign elaborate reasons, particularly considering the sensitivity of the case".

The court said it was inclined to accept the appeal considering the fact that the complainant had lodged the complaint almost eight years after the alleged incident, which had taken place in 2016 and the fact that she had also posted the post on facebook somewhere in 2018, making allegations against about 14 people, including the appellant with regard to the alleged sexual abuse, as also the fact that she had not gone to the Justice Hema Committee constituted by the High Court of Kerala for ventilating her grievance.

Siddique's appeal challenged the judgment and order of September 24, 2024 by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, rejecting the anticipatory bail application filed by him.

He sought the anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in connection with the FIR of August 27, 2024 registered at Police Station Museum, District Thiruvananthapuram City, for the offence under Sections 376 and 506 IPC.

Providing relief to the appellant, the bench said that in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR, he should be released on bail, subject to the conditions that may be imposed by the trial court, including the condition that the appellant should deposit the passport before the Trial Court and should cooperate with the Investigating Officer in carrying out the investigation.

"It is needless to say that any breach of the conditions that may be imposed by the Trial Court for releasing him on bail, shall entail cancellation of the bail," the bench clarified.

The High Court had declined pre arrest bail to Siddique, saying he is accused of raping a woman at Muscot Hotel in Trivandrum, where she had been invited to discuss a new film project. It had emphasised the necessity of Siddique’s custodial interrogation. The court had also observed that the nature of the allegations against the petitioner were serious, along with evidence suggesting his involvement in the crime.

The court also considered the argument by the petitioner that the complainant lacked credibility, claiming she was an "outspoken and vociferous lady" who had made allegations against fourteen other men and that there was eight-year delay in reporting the incident.

Finding these contentions unwarranted, the High Court had said, “A woman’s experiences of sexual assault are not a reflection of her character but rather an indication of her suffering. The attempt to blame a woman for speaking out may be a strategy to silence her, which is hostile to the supremacy of the law. The courts are called to evaluate the merits of the application, free from any prejudicial assumption of the survivor’s character. The core of the matter is whether the petitioner has prima facie committed the offences alleged against him and whether he is entitled to pre- arrest bail.”

With regards the delay in reporting the incident, the court emphasised that “Victims of sexual abuse and assault may experience psychological, emotional and social barriers that feed the delay in reporting the matter, which necessarily has to be understood in the context of the trauma.”

Further, the court also noted the petitioner's complete denial of the incident, the requirement for a pending potency test, and the prosecution's apprehension that the petitioner may intimidate witnesses as reasons to deny him bail.

The High Court had also noted in view of its direction to publicise the Justice K Hema Committee report, several victims, including the survivor mustered courage to step forward.

The 2019 report had exposed widespread allegations of sexual harassment and other issues faced by women in the Malayalam film industry.

Case Title: SIDDIQUE vs. STATE OF KERALA & ANR.