Actor Mala Parvathy approached the Supreme Court on Friday, November 29, challenging the Kerala High Court's directive to register First Information Reports (FIR) based on the depositions before the Hema Committee. She said that she gave statements before the Committee purely for “academic purposes” to help form recommendations and that they have now been “improperly transformed as a basis for initiating criminal proceedings”. Arguing that the Kerala High Court has “overstepped its jurisdiction” by directing the mandatory registration of FIRs, Mala Parvathy contended that this “encroaches on the investigative authority of the relevant agency”. She also added that the order “undermines the discretion” of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR.
The Hema Committee, constituted by the Kerala government to probe allegations of harassment in the Malayalam film industry, had recorded many statements from actors and technicians. It then released a report, which revealed that sexual harassment and power abuse are rampant in the industry. Based on this, on October 14, the Kerala High Court said that the witness statements deposed before the Committee amount to ‘information’ upon which legal action must be initiated and directed the SIT probing these allegations to initiate proceedings.
Mala Parvathy, in her plea before the Supreme Court, said that some of her statements to the Hema Committee were “hearsay allegations” that came to her attention, and those who made those allegations to her later changed their stance. However, after the SIT was formed, she said that the team reached out to her and many others who were reluctant to pursue legal action. She alleged that the SIT went ahead with FIRs without paying heed to her reluctance because of the HC order.
“It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner provided her statement to the Committee in confidentiality, with the understanding that it was solely for the purpose of preparing a report to enable the Committee or the Government to develop a comprehensive policy for the welfare of women in the industry. The statement was given with the clear intention of addressing the issues faced by women in the industry, and it was understood to be an academic exercise, not a precursor to any criminal proceedings. The petitioner further emphasizes that her statement was voluntarily provided based on the assurance from the Hemma Committee that no legal or criminal action would be taken against any individuals as a result of the statement. Therefore, the petitioner submits that the statement given to the Hemma Committee can no longer be regarded as "information" for the purpose of initiating an investigation and registering a crime, as contemplated under the relevant legal provisions,” her petition reads.
Mala Parvathy also alleged that individuals who are not directly connected to her statements are being called and harassed by the SIT. Stating that this not only tarnishes her integrity as an actor and undermines the very purpose of the Committee, but also diminishes the support that survivors of abuse are receiving.
The special bench which gave the directive to initiate criminal proceedings based on the Committee report was formed on September 5 by the Kerala HC, while the court was hearing an appeal by producer Sajimon Parayil challenging a single-judge order that allowed the release of the Hema Committee Report.
It was on July 6 that the State Information Commission (SIC) passed an order directing the Kerala government to issue the Hema Committee report to RTI applicants after redacting the names and identities of witnesses. While the report was scheduled to be released by 4 pm on July 24, Sajimon went to court and got a stay claiming that the report would affect his privacy. However, the HC directed to release the report, and it came out on August 13.
The version now available to the public has been heavily redacted to protect the privacy of those who deposed, with all identifiers removed, including the names of the alleged perpetrators. The report, however, has since emboldened many women in the industry to publicly share their traumatic experiences, triggering another #MeToo wave in Kerala.