Deepu Thomas v. State of Kerala

The Cyber Blog IndiaCase Summary

Bail application in a case involving the alleged circulation of nude photographs and videos

Deepu Thomas v. State of Kerala
In the High Court of Kerala
B.A. 797/2021
Before Justice Shircy V.
Decided on March 10, 2021

Relevancy of the case: Bail application in a case involving the alleged circulation of nude photographs and videos

Statutes and Provisions Involved

  • The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67A)
  • The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 34, 498A)

Relevant Facts of the Case

  • The first petitioner, in order to lead a luxurious life, developed intimacy with the complainant and received gold ornaments and money from her.
  • Later, the first petitioner and the complainant got married and started living as husband and wife.
  • The first petitioner took the complainant to different lodges where he forced her to call Mingle2 media with the intention to earn money by circulating nude photographs of the complainant.
  • The first petitioner, after collecting and transferring the money in his account, harassed the complainant mentally and physically.
  • Further, the complainant states that the first and second petitioners have misappropriated her gold ornaments and money.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

  • The respondent’s counsel opposed the application on the ground that the investigation is not complete. Further, the first petitioner earned money by sharing the nude photographs and videos of the complainant and later transferred the amount to his account. The learned counsel also stated that more time was required to investigate the relation of the second petitioner (mother of the first petitioner) in the present case.

Opinion of the Bench

  • The Court was of the view that a strong prima facie case was made out against the first petitioner based on the evidence collected in the investigation. There was no substantial evidence related to the direct involvement of the second petitioner and hence, only the second petitioner can be granted pre-arrest bail.

Final Decision

  • Pre-arrest bail was granted to the second petitioner.
  • The bail application of the first petitioner was disposed of.

This case summary has been prepared by Tuba Aftab, an undergraduate student at IIMT & School of Law, GGSIPU, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2021.