You are here
Home > Judgement > Rehana Fathima disappointed Supreme Court, Pre-Arrest bail rejected

Rehana Fathima disappointed Supreme Court, Pre-Arrest bail rejected

Supreme Court rejects Rehana Fathima Bail Plea
Reading Time: 2 minutes

The Supreme Court denied anticipatory bail to Rehana Fathima, accused under the POCSO Act, for making and publishing a video of her children painting on her semi-nude body.

On Friday, the bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai and Krishna Murari found the action of the mother Rehana Fathima a Prima fecie case of child pornography.

Expressing disappointment, Justice Arun Mishra asked to the Fathima’s counsel, senior advocate Gopal Shankaranarayanan, that “what kind of case have you brought before us? I am a bit surprised”.

After explaining the case by Sankaranarayan, Justice Mishra resented and said, “Not interested in this kind of a case. How can you make use of children for this? What kind of a culture will the children perceive?”.

“Why do you do all this? You might be an activist but why do this? What kind of nonsense is this? It is obscenity clearly which you are spreading. It will leave the society in a very bad taste.”, Justice Mishra said.

Fathima’s counsel replied that, “Her stand has always been if a man stands half-nude, nothing sexual about it. But if a woman does, it is considered obscene. She says the only way to go about this is to look sensitise people about this”. He further said that, “I’m not on the issue of morals here.”

Justice Mishra dismissed the plea and responded that “Yes, prima facie it does. High Court has already looked at the merits”.

“We find no ground to interfere with the impugned order(s) passed by the High Court. The Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.” Supreme Court

In the case, Fathima had earlier filed a petition before the Kerala High Court seeking anticipatory bail. Where the matter was presented before Justice PV Kunhikrishnan, who also disagreed with the petitioner argument.

“I am not in a position to agree with the petitioner that she should teach sex education to her children in this manner.” Justice PV Kunhikrishnan in the order

Justice Kunhikrishnan has also opined that “As a mother, it is her duty and responsibility to be the emotional anchor of their children so that they can face the storms of life.”

“The children are not born with a moral compass and it is the job of parents, especially of the mother, to build that compass for them. Be responsible enough to teach and demonstrate the values that your kids need in order to grow up as decent human beings.”

Editor
One place for Men related news, fashion, social issues. Stay connected. Lot more is coming...

Leave a Reply

Top