The court docket mentioned the girl solely allowed her physique for use as canvas for her youngsters to color on
Kochi:
The fitting of autonomy over one’s physique is usually denied to the fairer intercourse and they’re bullied, discriminated towards, remoted and persecuted for making selections about their our bodies and lives, the Kerala Excessive Court docket mentioned on Monday whereas discharging a girls’s rights activist in a POCSO case.
Rehana Fathima, a girl’s proper activist, was dealing with expenses underneath varied provisions of the POCSO, Juvenile Justice and the Info Know-how (IT) Acts for circulating a video wherein she was seen posing semi-nude for her minor youngsters, permitting them to color on her physique.
Discharging her from the case, Justice Kauser Edappagath mentioned that from the allegations towards the 33-year-old activist, it was not attainable to anybody to deduce that her youngsters had been used for any actual or simulated sexual acts and that too for sexual gratification.
The court docket mentioned that she solely allowed her physique for use as a canvas for her youngsters to color on.
“The fitting of a girl to make autonomous selections about her physique is on the very core of her basic proper to equality and privateness. It additionally falls inside the realm of non-public liberty assured by Article 21 of the Structure,” it mentioned.
The order got here on Fathima’s attraction towards a trial court docket determination dismissing her plea to be discharged from the case.
In her attraction within the excessive court docket, she had asserted that the physique portray was meant as a political assertion towards the default view of society that the bare higher physique of the feminine is sexualised in all contexts, whereas the bare male higher physique will not be handled to this default sexualisation.
Agreeing along with her contentions, Justice Edappagath mentioned that portray on the higher physique of a mom by her personal youngsters as an artwork mission “can’t be characterised as an actual or simulated sexual act nor can it’s mentioned that the identical was accomplished for the aim of sexual gratification or with sexual intent”.
The decide mentioned it was “harsh” to time period such an “harmless creative expression” as a utilization of a kid in an actual or simulated sexual act.
“There may be nothing to indicate that the youngsters had been used for pornography. There is no such thing as a trace of sexuality within the video. Portray on the bare higher physique of an individual, whether or not a person or a girl, can’t be acknowledged to be a sexually express act,” the court docket mentioned.
The prosecution had claimed that Fathima had uncovered her higher physique within the video and therefore, it was obscene and indecent.
Rejecting the competition, the court docket mentioned that “nudity and obscenity are usually not all the time synonymous”.
“It’s flawed to categorise nudity as basically obscene and even indecent or immoral,” it additional mentioned.
The court docket identified that ladies of decrease castes in Kerala had as soon as fought for the precise to cowl their breasts and that there have been murals, statues and artwork of deities within the semi-nude in historical temples and varied public areas all around the nation and these are thought-about as “holy”.
It additional mentioned that nude show of the higher physique of males isn’t thought-about obscene or indecent and isn’t sexualised, however “a feminine physique will not be handled in the identical manner”.
“Each particular person is entitled to the autonomy of his/her physique – this isn’t selective on gender. However we regularly discover this proper is diluted or denied to the fairer intercourse.
“The ladies are bullied, discriminated towards, remoted, and prosecuted for making selections about their our bodies and lives,” the court docket mentioned.
The court docket additional mentioned that there have been some who take into account feminine nudity as taboo and solely meant for erotic functions and the intention behind the video circulated by Fathima was to “expose this double normal prevailing in society”.
“Nudity shouldn’t be tied to intercourse. The mere sight of the bare higher physique of the girl shouldn’t be deemed to be sexual by default. So additionally, the depiction of the bare physique of a girl can’t per se be termed to be obscene, indecent, or sexually express,” Justice Edappagath mentioned.
The prosecution had additionally contended that the video was towards the general public notions of morality and would have a morally corruptive impact on the minds of people that watch it.
The court docket rejected this argument additionally by saying that notions of social morality are inherently subjective.
“Morality and criminality are usually not coextensive. What is taken into account as morally flawed will not be essentially legally flawed,” it mentioned.
The court docket identified that adultery, consensual same-sex relations and live-in relationships are thought-about immoral by many, however they’re authorized acts.
“Society’s morality and a few individuals’s sentiments can’t be the rationale for instituting a criminal offense and prosecuting an individual. An motion is permissible if it doesn’t violate any of the legal guidelines of the land,” it mentioned.
The court docket additionally famous that even from the statements given by Fathima’s youngsters, they’re liked and cared for by their mom.
“A mother-child relationship is likely one of the earth’s most solemn and pious relationships. There is no such thing as a bond stronger and extra honest than the one between a mom and her little one.
“Little doubt, the prosecution of the petitioner (Fathima) may have torture and opposed impact on the youngsters. Therefore, in one of the best curiosity of the victims additionally, the prosecution can’t be allowed to be continued,” it mentioned.
Justice Edappagath mentioned that the decrease court docket fully ignored the context wherein the video was revealed and the message it had given to the general public at massive.
“There is no such thing as a enough floor for continuing towards the petitioner. The impugned order is, accordingly, put aside and the petitioner is discharged,” the excessive court docket mentioned.
The case was registered by Kochi metropolis police underneath varied sections of Safety of Youngsters from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and IT Act primarily based on a report filed by Cyberdom, the cyber wing of Kerala police, towards her for posting the video titled “Physique and Politics” on social media.
Earlier, the girl was additionally booked by police in Pathanamthitta district underneath the Info Know-how Act and the Juvenile Justice Act on a grievance lodged by BJP OBC Morcha chief A V Arun Prakash.
The Kerala State Fee for Safety of Little one Rights had additionally sought a report on the matter from Pathanamthitta district police chief and had additionally directed the police to register a case towards the girl underneath varied sections of the POCSO Act.
Fathima had tried to enter the Lord Ayyappa shrine in Sabarimala after the Supreme Court docket allowed girls of menstruating age to take action, and was focused by sure teams for it.
(Apart from the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV employees and is revealed from a syndicated feed.)