Magistrate Could Not Have Taken Cognizance After 15 Yrs: Kerala High Court Quashes Outraging Modesty Case Against Film Director Ranjith

Justice C Pratheep Kumar, allowed the petition to quash the proceedings presently pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam and observed:

“Since the maximum punishment provided for the offence under Section 368 and 509 IPC as on the date of the offence was only two years and as per Section 468 CrPC, the period of limitation was only 3 years from the date of commission of offence. The learned Magistrate was not justified in taking cognizance to the offence after a period of more than 15 years. In the above circumstance, the proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed by invoking the power 528 of BNSS.”

The FIR against the petitioner was lodged in August 2024, alleging in 2009, Ranjith had invited the actress to his apartment for a movie discussion where he inappropriately held her hand and attempted to touch her body with sexual intent.

Earlier, the High Court had closed his anticipatory bail petition noting that the alleged offence under Section 354 was bailable in 2009, when the incident allegedly took place.

The Court had earlier called for a report from Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ernakulam, as to whether a specific order was passed by the Court under Section 473 CrPC for condoning the delay before taking cognizance of the offence. When the matter was considered today, it was noted that the Magistrate had deferred from giving a report till the appreciation of evidence in the case.

The Court thus relied on Johnson Alexander v State by CBI(Crl. A. No 1478/ 2010), and quashed the proceedings against Ranjith.

Case Title: Ranjith Balakrishnan v State of Kerala

Case Number: Crl MC 250/2025

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 685

Counsel for Petitioner: Santheep Ankarath, Sherry M V