Karnataka High Court Quashes 2012 'Unnatural Sex' Case Against Director Ranjith Balakrishnan, Says Allegations Have No Strong Basis -

The Karnataka Excessive Court docket At this time (July 4) dismissed a 2012 unnatural intercourse case towards Malayalam filmmaker Ranjith Balakrishnan. The courtroom discovered main factual errors and an unexplained 12-year delay within the grievance.

Thanks for studying this put up, remember to subscribe!

Karnataka High Court Quashes 2012 'Unnatural Sex' Case Against Director Ranjith Balakrishnan, Says Allegations Have No Strong Basis

Bengaluru: In a giant aid for Malayalam filmmaker Ranjith Balakrishnan, the Karnataka Excessive Court docket on Friday cancelled a 2012 case the place he was accused of unnatural intercourse by an aspiring male actor.

Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar heard the petition filed by Ranjith and agreed to shut the case fully.

ALSO READ: BREAKING | “Don’t See God In Us, See God In Justice”: Supreme Court Justice MM Sundresh Breaks The Myth Of God-Like Judges

The grievance was made by a struggling actor, who stated that Ranjith pressured him into unnatural sexual acts in 2012 on the Taj Resort close to Bengaluru Worldwide Airport. He claimed that he was referred to as to the fourth ground of the lodge for a gathering, the place the alleged incident occurred.

Nonetheless, Senior Advocate Prabhuling Navadgi, who appeared for Ranjith, informed the courtroom that your complete case was pretend. He highlighted an necessary truth: the Taj Resort close to the airport was not even open in 2012—it was launched in 2016.

ALSO READ: Supreme Court Justice NK Singh Hard-Hitting Warning: “False Complaints Under PoSH Act Are Dangerous, Can Damage the System”

This clear timeline error made the courtroom query the truthfulness of the allegations.

This main factual mistake had earlier led one other Excessive Court docket decide, Justice M. Nagaprasanna, to remain the authorized course of towards the filmmaker. That decide had additionally stated that the 12-year delay in submitting the grievance was not defined correctly. The lengthy delay made the case look suspicious and raised doubts concerning the complainant’s intention.

ALSO READ: Kolkata Law College Gang-Rape | “Raped On Camera. Sure She Won’t Go To Cops”: Monojit ‘Mango’ Mishra’s Shocking Confession

Ranjith Balakrishnan was earlier charged underneath Part 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which offers with unnatural offences, and in addition underneath Part 66E of the Data Know-how Act, associated to privateness violations.

The filmmaker approached the Excessive Court docket with a request to cancel the FIR (First Data Report).

Lastly, the courtroom discovered no sturdy motive to proceed the case and cancelled all proceedings.

ALSO READ: EXCLUSIVE | Kolkata Law College Gang Rape | “If Justice Is Silenced, No Woman Is Safe”: Supreme Court Lawyer Urges CJI To Take Suo Moto Cognizance

Advocate Joseph Anthony filed the petition.

Part 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) criminalized “carnal intercourse towards the order of nature” with any man, lady, or animal. This broadly included consensual sexual acts between same-sex people, which had been deemed “unnatural offenses”. Whereas the part was partially struck down in 2018, it nonetheless applies to non-consensual acts and sexual acts on animals.

ALSO READ: NEET-UG 2025 | “We Can’t Tackle Individual Examinations”: Supreme Court Rejects Plea Over Exam Question Error

Part 66E of the Data Know-how Act, 2000, in India, offers with the punishment for violation of privateness by means of the seize, publication, or transmission of pictures of a non-public space of any individual with out their consent, underneath circumstances violating their privateness. It primarily criminalizes voyeurism and different types of privateness invasion utilizing digital means.

CASE TITLE:
Ranjith Balkrishnan vs State of Karnataka
WP 32231/2024