The Special Investigation Team (SIT) looking into the findings of the Hema committee report on issues faced by women in the Malayalam film industry has the huge task of identifying and recording the statements of the deponents.
The identification of the complainants will be crucial as the panel has “avoided recording of the names and other details of the witnesses in their statements.” The panel decided thus as its task was to “study and report the problems faced by women in cinema for which, it is not necessary to mention the names of the persons who confided with us, various facts from their own experiences.”
The panel report has returned to public attention with the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court asking the SIT to look into the panel report. The team had so far sidestepped the report and focussed on the complaints raised by the women in public.
The Division Bench consisting of Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and C.S. Sudha, which was “perplexed by the inaction of the State government” on the report had asked the SIT to look into the report to find out whether any offence had been committed and act by treating the contents of the report as “information” to set law in motion.
Electronic evidence
The SIT will also have to sieve through the electronic evidence collected by the panel, including WhatsApp chats, audio clips and screenshots, to identify the complainants and record their statements. If the team is prima facie convinced of the commission of any cognisable offence, it may register First Information Report and further investigate the case. The team can even take the statements of the members of the panel, K. Hema, K.B. Valsalakumari, and actor Sharada if it feels so, judicial sources indicated.
Sticking to statement
The probe also runs the risk of hitting a roadblock if the deponents refuse to stand by their earlier statements. If so, the team may file a refer report to close the investigation. It the deponents go back on their statements, it would have no legal consequences as they were not given before a court of law. Moreover, there was no cross-examination of the statements by the persons against whom the allegations were made, which takes away the evidentiary value of the statements, sources said.
The High Court has sought an action taken report from the SIT within a fortnight.
Published - September 12, 2024 08:31 pm IST
