Kerala

SC dismisses activist Rehana Fathima’s bail plea in child video case

Dismissing the plea, Justice Arun Mishra expressed bafflement at the ‘kind of case’ brought before the court.

Written by : TNM Staff

A Supreme Court bench on Friday dismissed Kerala activist Rehana Fathima’s plea seeking anticipatory bail in the case related to a controversial video with her children. After the Kerala High Court refused her pre-arrest bail, Rehana’s counsel had moved the top court challenging the high court order late July.

Rehana was booked under sections of the POCSO Act (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) after she uploaded a video of her children painting on her semi-naked body.

On Friday, a bench led by Justice Arun Mishra rejected the plea, stating that prima facie, POCSO charges apply to the accused activist in the case. The activist’s counsel Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayan had argued that section 13 of POCSO (using a child in any media, for the purpose of sexual gratification) will not apply to the activist as the “children are fully clothed in the video.”

The activist had also argued that her intent was to normalise the female body and  “to spread a message to not allow ‘distorted ideas of sexualisation' in the minds of children”. She had also added that she allowed her children to paint on her body ‘like a canvas’ and only a ‘pervert’ can sexualise such an act.

Dismissing the plea, Justice Mishra expressed bafflement at the ‘kind of case’ brought before the court.

“Why do you do all this? You might be an activist but why do this? What kind of nonsense is this? How can you make use of children for this? What kind of a culture will the children perceive?” Justice Arun Mishra, who was heading the bench, was quoted as saying.

The judge added that the video will count as obscenity and that it will “leave the society in a very bad taste.”

Earlier the Kerala High Court had rejected her anticipatory bail plea, with the judge stating that ‘he is not in a position to say that no offence under POCSO Act and other sections is attracted in this case’.

The High Court also said that this was not ‘a fit case where the petitioner could be released on bail’ and added that it looked like the ‘children were used for sexual gratification’ in an ‘obscene’ manner.

Rehana had challenged this order by moving the Supreme court and in her plea argued that the children ‘were painting in an expressionless manner’ and hence impossible to conclude that they were ‘used for sexual gratification’.

How a Union govt survey allows states to fraudulently declare they are manual scavenging free

Dravida Nadu’s many languages: The long shadow of linguistic state formation

Documents show Adani misled investors on corruption probe, will SEBI act?

Meth, movies and money laundering: The ED chargesheet against Jaffar Sadiq

What Adani's US indictment means and its legal ramifications in India