Kerala Court Denies Bail To Rahul Easwar Booked For Making Sexually-Colored Remarks, Disclosing Identity Of Rape Victim
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram has denied bail to commentator Rahul Easwar in a case launched against him for allegedly disclosing the identity of a rape survivor and sexually harassing her.The prosecution allegation is that Easwar procured the photos and details of the complainant, who has accused Palakkad Constituency MLA Rahul Mamkootathil of rape and...
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram has denied bail to commentator Rahul Easwar in a case launched against him for allegedly disclosing the identity of a rape survivor and sexually harassing her.
The prosecution allegation is that Easwar procured the photos and details of the complainant, who has accused Palakkad Constituency MLA Rahul Mamkootathil of rape and coerced miscarriage, and published the same in Facebook and other social media platforms in contravention of law. He is accused of making several vulgar and sexually coloured remarks against the afore victim through his YouTube channel.
Easwar is accused of the offences under Sections 72 [Disclosure of identity of the victim of certain offences, etc.], 75(1)(iv) [Sexual harassment], 79 [Uttering any word or making any gesture intended to insult the modesty of a woman, etc.], 351(1), 351(2) [Criminal intimidation] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 43 [Penalty and compensation for damage to computer, computer system, etc] r/w 66 [Computer related offences] of Information Technology Act.
He is arrayed as the 5th accused in Thiruvananthapuram City Cyber Crime Police Station Crime No. 169/2025 and was arrested today and produced before the Magistrate court. At that time, he applied for bail.
Easwar claimed that he was not given any proper notice u/s 35(1) of BNSS and that the only non-bailable offence alleged is that under Section 75 BNS. He also urged that there was no records produced by the police to show that he made any sexually coloured remarks against the victim. He prayed for bail stating that a gag order can be made along with stringent conditions.
The prosecution submitted that the Youtube videos in question are recovered and a separate mahazar is being filed. It was also argued that custodial interrogation was necessary and that the prosecution was yet to recover the electronic devices. Since there was every chance of tampering with evidence, the prosecution opposed the bail plea.
Dismissing the bail, Magistrate, Elsa Catherine George, observed:
"The ingredients of the offence punishable u/s 75(1)(iv) are prima facie brought out from the available records. The act of making such remarks on social media platforms against the victim of an offence, for which a case is registered and investigation is ongoing, cannot be viewed lightly. Moreover, investigation in the case has just started. In case, the accused is released on bail, he is likely to impede the course of investigation. There is every possibility of committing similar offences and tampering with available digital and other evidence involved. The other accused involved are yet to be arrested. In the above circumstances, considering the nature and gravity of the alleged offences and the stage of investigation, I find that the petitioner / accused No.5 is not to be enlarged on bail at this stage."
Case No: CMP 5050/2025
Case Title: Rahul K. Easwar v. State of Kerala