Synopsis: They argued that after their complaints to the police did not elicit any response, they were compelled to take action against Nair.
Bhagyalakshmi, a Malayalam film industry dubbing artist, and two others, Sajna N.S. (Diya Sana) and Sreelakshmi Arackal, in a case registered for assaulting YouTuber Vijay P Nair, have moved the Kerala High Court requesting anticipatory bail.
The Bench of Justice Ashok Menon, has reserved judgement in the case, allowing the three to be safe from arrest until then.
In his vulgar remarks against one of the women and against ‘feminists’ in general, the women rushed to Nair’s office and poured black oil on his forehead. On Facebook, the assault was streamed live.
The video is now on YouTube and with more than 2 Lakh views, has gone viral.
The bail applicants mentioned that after their complaints to the police did not evoke a response, they were compelled to take action against Nair.
They were booked after their attack on Nair, under Sections 452 (House-trespass after preparation for injury, assault or wrongful restraint), 294 B (sings, recites or misspells any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place), 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing injury), 506 (criminal intimidation), 392 (punishment for robbery), 34 (acts committed by several persons supporting disturbance), and 34 (acts perpetrated by several persons trying to promote disturbance).
Advocate K.P. Jayachandran, counsel for the three women, argued that they had gone to Nair’s house on an appeal and that they had no intention of robbing him. Their lack of motive was shown by the fact that, after the incident, they gave Nair’s laptop and phone to the police. He also claimed that the attack was due to an attempt by Nair to physically harm them while they were in his house.
Suman Chakravarthy, the prosecutor, admitted that Nair had made derogatory statements against the women, but claimed that they had booked him.
The arrangements for the purpose of Section 452 were demonstrated by the fact that they went with nettle oil and ink to Nair’s house.
Two people tried to interfere in this matter during the proceedings. One individual requested the accused’s denial of bail to “send a clear message to society” and the second requested the prosecution of the second accused, who allegedly brought nettle oil and assaulted Nair.
“As a feminist, she is camouflaging herself”, argued Advocate Renjith B. Marar, on behalf of the unnamed claimant.
Justice Menon said that it was the duty of the Court to ensure that a correct message was sent to society, and stated that the requests for intervention would be outrightly be rejected.
The judgement in the original case will be pronounced on 30th October.