Sexual harassment claim will not be ‘prima facie valid’ if the woman wore ‘provocative dress’: Indian court

In a sexual harassment case, the Kozhikode sessions court in India’s southern state of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to writer and social activist Civic Chandran, observing that the charge under Section 354 (A) (sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code would not be attracted if the woman was dressed in ‘sexually provocative’ attire. Chandran was granted anticipatory bail on August 12 after including photographs of the complainant in his bail application. On August 2, he obtained anticipatory bail in another sexual harassment case.

According to the prosecution, the alleged incident occurred on February 8, this year, at a camp organised by Chandran and others near Koyilandy in Kozhikode district. When the participants were returning from the camp, Chandran allegedly groped and inappropriately touched her. The woman filed a complaint on July 29, and Chandran was charged under sections 354A (2), 341 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code. The 74-year-old accused submitted photographs of the woman with his bail application.

The district sessions judge S Krishna Kumar granted Chandran anticipatory bail, stating, ‘In order to attract Section 354 A (sexual harassment), there must be physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures. A demand or request for sexual favours must exist. There has to be a sexually charged remark. The photographs submitted with the accused’s anticipatory bail application show the complainant exposing herself in sexually provocative dresses. Section 354 A will not be used against the accused’.

Chandran has been accused of sexual harassment in two cases, the first by a writer from a Scheduled Tribe community who accused him of sexual harassment at a book exhibition in April. The other was filed by a young writer who claimed he sexually harassed her at a local book fair in February 2020. The Koyilandy police had filed cases against Chandran but had been unable to apprehend him because he had been on the run since the first case was filed. In the first case, Chandran received anticipatory bail on August 2.