The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a plea challenging the Kerala High Court's directive, which ordered a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to register FIRs and investigate allegations of sexual exploitation of women artists in the Malayalam film industry.

The petitioners argued that the investigation was proceeding without substantial evidence and solely based on the 2019 Justice Hema Committee report.

A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta stated, "There can be no direction to injunct or restrain the police officer from proceeding in accordance with the law."

The plea was filed by film producer Sajimon Parayil, an actress, and a witness, who claimed they were being pressured by the SIT to provide statements. They were aggrieved by the Kerala High Court's refusal to consider their objections regarding the investigation.

However, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s position, stating that under criminal jurisprudence, once a police officer has reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence, they are duty-bound to act as per the law, specifically under Section 176 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS). The court emphasized that the High Court’s division bench had been closely monitoring the proceedings, as reflected in its subsequent orders.

The petitioners clarified that they did not oppose criminal prosecution, FIR registration, or investigation, provided there was credible evidence. However, they argued that the SIT was registering cases hastily and compelling witnesses to testify without sufficient evidence, making the process unjust.

They further contended that no FIRs or preliminary inquiries (PEs) were registered before October 23, 2024, when the Supreme Court took notice of the matter. They alleged that the state’s actions were a mala fide attempt to preempt judicial scrutiny.

The apex court ruled that affected individuals who had testified before the Hema Committee and were being pressured to testify before the SIT could seek redress from the Kerala High Court. It directed the High Court to consider specific grievances and ensure that individuals were not harassed or coerced during the investigation.

"The High Court will also look into the grievances of those individuals who deposed before the Hema Committee, ensuring that they are not unnecessarily harassed, coerced, or compelled to testify before the SIT," the bench clarified.

The Supreme Court disposed of the matter, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the High Court with their concerns.

The Kerala government constituted the Justice Hema Committee in 2017 at the request of the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC). The committee, led by retired High Court judge Justice K. Hema, actor T. Sharda, and retired bureaucrat Basala Kumari, was tasked with examining the working conditions, welfare, and challenges faced by women in the Malayalam film industry. The committee submitted its report on December 31, 2019, but no significant action was taken for an extended period.

Subsequently, Sajimon Parayil filed a writ petition before a single judge of the Kerala High Court, seeking to prevent the report from being made public, citing privacy and confidentiality concerns. On August 13, 2024, the single judge dismissed the plea, ruling that the petitioner lacked locus standi.

Following a plea from certain activists, the High Court’s division bench on September 10, 2024, approved the formation of an SIT under the Director General of Police. The seven-member team, led by the Inspector General and Commissioner of Police, Thiruvananthapuram City, operates under the supervision of the Additional Director General of Police, Crime Branch.

Case Title: Sajimon Parayil vs. State of Kerala & Ors.