Supreme Court Refuses To Stop Police Investigation On Statements Before Justice Hema Committee Regarding Women's Exploitation In Malayalam Cinema

The Supreme Court on Friday (February 7) refused to interfere with the directions of the Kerala High Court to register FIRs based on the depositions given by witnesses/victims before the Justice Hema Committee regarding the sexual exploitation of women in the Malayalam cinema field.

A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed that once an information regarding the commisison of cognizable offence is received, the police officer is bound to proceed under the law and that there cannot be a direction to injunct the police's powers to investigate.

The bench pronounced the order disposing of the Special Leave Petitions filed by film producer Sajimon Parayil and two actors challenging the direction issued by the Kerala High Court in October last year.

"Under criminal jurisprudence, once information is received or otherwise the officer in charge of the police station has reason to suspect that a cognizable offence has been committed, he is duty bound to proceed in accordance with the law as prescribed under Section 176 BNSS. There can be no direction to injunction or restrain the police from proceeding in accordance with the law," the bench observed.

Noting that the division bench of the Kerala High Court is monitoring the investigation, the Supreme Court left it open to the persons who have deposed before the Hema Committee and who are being allegedly harassed by the SIT to move the High Court to raise their grievances. If any such grievances are raised, the High Court shall examine them. The High Court will also examine if the FIRs are registered based on the materials collected by the SIT or if they have been registered without any materials. The High Court will also look into the grievances of those individuals who had deposed before Justice Hema Committee that they are unnecessarily harassed or coerced or compelled to depose before the SIT, the Court added.

What was under challenge was the direction issued by the division bench of the High Court on October 14, 2024. Noting that the statements recorded by the Justice Hema Committee revealed cognizable offences, the High Court directed that "the statements given before the Committee shall be treated as 'information' as contemplated under Sec. 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and the SIT shall take necessary action as contemplated therein subject to Sec.173(3) BNSS."

Challenging the High Court's direction, film producer Sajimon Parayil approached the Supreme Court. Later, two women actors, who had appeared before the Justice Hema Committee, also approached the Supreme Court, stating that they gave the depositions in "academic interest" and not with the intention to initiate any criminal proceedings. One of them stated that the statements given by her were based on hearsay accounts regarding the exploitations faced by other women and that many of them were not willing to be part of the criminal investigation.  

The Supreme Court had reserved orders on the petitions on January 21.

Cases : Sajimon Parayil v State of Kerala and others | SLP(C) 25250-25251/2024, Juli CJ v State of Kerala and others | SLP(C) No.27320-27321/2024, Parvathi T v State of Kerala and others | Diary No. 55412-2024

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 182

Click here to read the judgment