Kerala High Court: Gopinath P., J., granted bail to the bridal make up artist who was alleged to have sexually assaulted several women in the guise of applying make up.

In the present matter, a person sought anticipatory bail in 4 cases registered against him.

In one of the matters, it was alleged that the de facto complainant had gone to the Bridal Studio of the petitioner for makeup and petitioner had inappropriately touched her on her private parts under the guise of applying the make up on her neck etc. Further, it was alleged that the petitioner inappropriately pulled the t-shirt of the de facto complainant.

Further, in another matter, it was alleged that the petitioner made the de facto complainant stand before him wearing a sari blouse and underskirt alone and also asked her various questions with sexual innuendos and also as to whether she had any sexual relationship with her fiancé earlier and also touched her on her private parts and pulled her underclothing and thereby he committed the offences under Sections 354, 354A(1)(i), 354-A(2), 354A(1)(iv), 354-A(3) and 509 of the Penal Code, 1860.

Moving to the other matter, it was alleged that the de facto complainant had gone to the makeup studio of the petitioner for bridal makeup, the petitioner had under the guise of applying make up put his hand inside the blouse of the de facto complainant and touched her on her private parts inappropriately and had thereafter sent messages to her asking her as to whether she enjoyed the make up session and as to whether her husband as at home etc.

Lastly, in another incident, it was alleged that in the guise of showing the de facto complainant around the studio, the petitioner started touching and groping the de facto complainant. Later, the de facto complainant somehow managed to escape from the clutches of the petitioner and rushed home and informed the matter to her mother and to her grandmother.

Analysis and Decision

In totality, it was alleged that the petitioner had made inappropriate advances and had attempted to sexually molest the victims/de facto complainants while applying the bridal make up on them.

High Court opined that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail in all the cases registered against him subject to the conditions.

Out of the offences registered against the petitioner in the cases, the non-bailable offences were those under Sections 354 and 354B of the Penal Code, 1860.

Further, taking into account the allegations raised against the petitioner, Bench expressed that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary for a proper investigation into the cases registered against the petitioner. Hence, Court allowed the bail applications subject to the following conditions:

  • Petitioner shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs 1,00,000 each with two solvent sureties each for the lime sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.
  • Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation in every manner.
  • Petitioner shall surrender his passport
  • Petitioner shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainants or interfere with the investigation or influence or intimidate any witness
  • He shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

[Anex Anzare v. State of Kerala, 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 2001, decided on 25-4-2022]

Advocates before the Court:

For the Petitioner:






           SARATH K.P.



For the Respondent:


            R3 BY ADV. R. SUDHA

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.