Under the August 2 ruling, Civic Chandran is granted bail due to his activism against the caste system making it difficult for the judiciary to believe that he will “touch the body of the woman fully knowing she is of the Scheduled Caste.”
74-year-old Civic Chandran was accused of sexually harassing two women but the resolution of the case, in the form of anticipatory bail, involves several doses of misogyny and casteism, that must be further examined and were received by widespread public criticism.
The reasoning the Kozhikode Sessions Court derived behind one of the allegations was that Chandran was “too old to have harassed a woman” AND he was “provoked by the victim’s sexually provocative clothing. The court’s reasoning is based on disconcerting ambiguity as it’s unclear whether the harassment did not take place because of the age or it did take place but it cannot be classified as harassment since the woman “exposed” her body and brought it upon her self. Both angles come from a place of ignorance which unfairly assumes that age is a factor in sexual harassment and misogyny where the onus of such a heinous act is manipulated and placed on the victim, more often than not a woman.Â
In the first case where a Dalit poet alleged that Chandran, on the morning of April 17 2022, revealed his “love” for her and kissed her on the back of her neck, the Kozhikode Sessions Court judge S, Krishna Kumar, ruled that it was “highly improbable” that the 42-year-old “well-built” victim could be overpowered by Chandran. The age and the physical ability of a victim is not a point of contention when determining someone as a sexual predator and is simply used in a manner to shift the blame to the victim and falsely highlight them as incapable of being vulnerable at the time of such a vile act. Sexual harassment is a deeply traumatizing incident and one’s response can vary greatly in each person and the onus of the outcome of that incident must never be placed on the victim’s response to it.
In the second case, the victim alleged that at a beach gathering on February 8, 2020, Chandran coerced her to a secluded area and proceeded to molest her. In his defence, the accused submitted Facebook pictures of the victim from the date of the harassment to allege the victim wearing sexually provocative clothing. While this allegation being used as the accused’s defence is problematic and disconcerting in the first place, the fact that this evidence was accepted by the court under the premise of “the photographs revealing that the defacto complainant herself is exposing to dresses which are having some sexual provocative tone and hence section 354A (sexual harassment) will not prima facie stand against the accused,” is much more.
It is downright horrifying that an outdated argument such as this still stands in the court of law and grants an alleged sexual harasser the freedom to live his life without any repercussions and the chance to commit further such crimes while misogyny continues to prevail and the victims continue to live in fear of their perpetrator.
Furthermore, the court believes that the success of the victims’ children is a satisfactory reason for granting bail. With this reasoning, it is further solidified that the court is not basing its ruling on fair, open-minded, and even reasonable judgement. One’s economic and social standing and other such personal aspects should never be taken into consideration during the case of sexual harassment. Their success is not directly proportional to the fact that Civic Chandran is a sexual predator, in fact, it does not correlate whatsoever.
Another argument made was that Civic Chandran was unaware that the victim was Dalit, demanding therefore that the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against him be dropped. The fact that this argument was made and considered by the court proves that the purpose of the ruling was to make it “less of a crime” rather than proving no crime at all took place. The case became so convoluted with the unreasonable judgement that the court found a way to justify these half-truths of “lesser crimes” and grant Civic Chandran anticipatory bail on both counts.Â
“The copy of the SSLC book of the accused shows that he had refused to mention caste name in it. The accused is a reformist and is engaged in fighting against the caste system, writing for a casteless society. It is highly unbelievable that he will touch the body of the victim fully knowing she is of the Scheduled Caste,” the order said.
Civic Chandran is being presented to the court and by the court in a certain manner due to his status in society as a social activist. The court ruling benefits the accused and discourages victims from coming forward with their allegations. The disclosure of sexual harassment allegations is constantly shamed by society and to seek legal recourse requires a lot from the victim. The legal system functions against victims and very few come to receive “justice” for the further trauma they incur in the legal process.
