Rape survivor moves Supreme Court against anticipatory bail granted to Kerala MLA Rahul Mamkootathil

The survivor in the first of three rape cases registered against Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) and former Congress leader Rahul Mamkootathil has moved the Supreme Court challenging an order of the Kerala High Court which granted him anticipatory bail in the case.

The rape case was registered after the survivor and her family submitted a written complaint directly to Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on November 27, 2025, accusing the MLA of rape, pregnancy through sexual assault and forced abortion.

She also alleged that Mamkootathil recorded their intimate videos without her consent and threatened to circulate them if she did not comply with his demands.

On February 12, Kerala High Court single-judge Justice Kauser Edappagath granted Mamkootathil anticipatory bail in the case.

In her petition challenging the same, the survivor argued that the MLA's actions fall squarely under the definition of 'rape' under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

She also objected to certain observations made by the High Court in its order, specifically regarding there being a consensual relationship between her and Mamootathil, with references to her repeatedly visiting the MLA.

The survivor argued that such remarks were not just unwarranted but were also not sufficient reason to grant anticipatory bail. The High Court's observations amounted to questioning her character, the survivor submitted.

"The Hon’ble High Court erred to appreciate that no person has right to sexually assault the victim for the reason that she voluntarily came to his room. Only because the victim had known the accused or that she was in cordial relations with him, will not make her responsible for the sexual assault," the plea stated.

She further argued that past relationships or past consensual sexual intercourse do not grant perpetual blanket consent.

Another contention raised by the survivor is that coercing her to consume medication for abortion under repeated threats of suicide falls under Section 69 of BNS, which penalises causing miscarriage without a woman's consent.

The survivor also alleged in her plea that Mamkootathil has a habit of preying on vulnerable women who are in distress, troubled marriages, or separated from their spouses. In this regard, she pointed to the fact that three rape cases have been registered against Mamkootathil so far. She also claimed that, as per information provided by the authorities, nearly ten victims have been identified, including one minor.

She further argued that the High Court did not take into account the position of power that Mamkootathil continues to hold. Mamkootathil has secured a fan following for himself and these fans have been cyberbullying and sending threats to her, the survivor claimed in her petition. A few among those instigating attacks against her are prominent personalities such as Rahul Easwar, advocate Deepa Joseph, and Sandeep Warrier, the petition stated. Easwar, in fact, spent over a week in jail for revealing the identity of the survivor.

Arguing that there is a clear prima facie case against Mamkootathil, the survivor has sought to set aside the order of the High Court granting anticipatory bail to Mamkootathil.