Kerala Court Grants Bail to T G Mohandas in Case Over Remarks Against Women Protesters [Read Order]

Thiruvananthapuram: The Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram, has granted bail to 71-year-old journalist and political commentator T G Mohandas, arrested in a cyber crime case over videos he uploaded about the protest at Jantar Mantar, Delhi, after finding that police had failed to follow the mandatory pre-arrest notice procedure under the new criminal code.

Mohandas was booked under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act, and Sections 79, 192, 353(1)(b) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, after uploading videos on the YouTube channel “Pathrika” on 24 and 25 July 2026. The prosecution alleged that the videos targeted protesters at Jantar Mantar, contained remarks insulting women participants, and called for students at the protest to be shot, amounting to criminal intimidation.

He was arrested and produced before the court on 10 August 2026, and the bail plea was heard and decided the same day. His counsel, Advocate Shekar G Thampi, argued that the case was politically motivated, pointing to Mohandas's association with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Bharatiya Janata Party, and to the complainant's links with an organisation said to be affiliated with the Social Democratic Party of India. The court declined to go into the political angle at the bail stage.

The court noted that of the offences alleged, only Section 353(1)(b) of the BNS was non-bailable, and that it carries a maximum sentence of three years. Counsel for the accused argued that the police had skipped the mandatory notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita before arrest, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, which held that such a notice, for offences carrying up to seven years' imprisonment, “is the rule, while an arrest… is a clear exception.”

The investigating officer had recorded that no notice was issued because of apprehensions that Mohandas might abscond, destroy digital evidence, or influence witnesses. The court found these apprehensions unsupported: the police had located Mohandas at his known residence and conducted a search there, and had already seized his Vivo mobile phone, Seagate hard disk, DBC modem and JTP microphone. In the court's view, this was inconsistent with any real risk of abscondence or evidence destruction, and the failure to issue notice under Section 35(3) had not been satisfactorily justified.

The court was also unpersuaded that custodial interrogation was necessary, noting that the relevant devices had already been recovered and that Mohandas had already been questioned by the investigating agency. The prosecution's submissions that the investigation was at an early stage, that other accused were yet to be identified, and that the owner of the YouTube channel remained unknown, were not, by themselves, sufficient grounds to keep him in custody.

The defence also cited Mohandas's age, a past stroke, and ongoing treatment for psoriasis and early-stage Parkinson's disease, submitting that continued detention would endanger his health. The prosecution did not contest these medical claims.

The court accordingly granted bail on stringent conditions: a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties for the like sum; appearance before the investigating officer for interrogation on 11, 12 and 13 August 2026; and thereafter weekly appearances every Monday for two months or until the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. Mohandas was barred from inducing or threatening witnesses or tampering with evidence, and from committing any similar offence. While permitted to continue using digital platforms and social media for legitimate journalism, he was restrained from publishing any content relating to the case intended to influence, intimidate or harm the complainant or witnesses. Any breach, the court held, would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.

Case Title: T. G. Mohandas vs. State of Kerala, Crl.MP No. 1/2026 in Crime No. 95/2026

[Read Order]