The District and Sessions Court, Ernakulam on Saturday (March 7) granted anticipatory bail to Manjummel Boys fame film director and screenwriter Chidambaram S. Poduval.
Sri. K.K. Balakrishnan, District Judge passed the order granting bail to Chidambaram on conditions.
The prosecution allegation is that in the first week of May, 2022, Chidambaram trespassed into the bedroom of the de facto complainant with an intention to outrage her modesty and that he pressed on her breast.
On February 28 2026, a crime was registered by the Ernakulam South Police Station based on the First Information Statement of the de facto complainant for the offences punishable under Sections 354 [Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty], 354A(1)(i) [Sexual harassment] and 509 [Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman] IPC.
The bail application was moved on March 3 and the Court had called for a report along with the Case Diary. The Court had then heard arguments adduced by Chidambaram’s counsel and the prosecution on Friday and reserved its verdict.
According to Chidambaram, he is a celebrated director in the Malayalam film industry and it was during the production and shooting of Manjummel Boys that he met the de facto complainant for playing a role in the film.
He has contended that his behaviour with the de facto complainant was professional and it was she who, in fact, started a ‘campaign’ to tarnish his image and reputation. He has also alleged that the complainant posted a reel on her Instagram profile and made sexual assault allegations against him.
He also submitted that he had approached the Bombay High Court and filed a damage suit against her and an interim order was granted in December 2025 restraining her from publishing defamatory news in any media platform. According to him, the present case was falsely created by her to counter the legal consequences of publishing defamatory content against him.
Chidamabaram pointed out there has been a delay of 4 years in reporting the case and that he has no criminal antecedents. Since the de facto complainant is abroad, no materials are collected and also, there is no need for custodial interrogation.
The prosecution opposed the bail application. He pointed out the possibility of influencing witnesses and causing hindrance to the investigation.
“No criminal antecedents are pointed out against the petitioner. The nature of allegations does not suggest custodial interrogation of the petitioner. The incident was in the year 2022. There is a delay of 4 years in filing the petition. Moreover, Ho’ble Bombay High Court passed an order against the defacto complainant restraining her from publishing any defamatory contend in any platform. The FIR is registered on 28.02.2026. The investigating officer reported that she is not cooperating with the investigation. Considering all the above said aspects, I am of the view that this is a fit case to invoke the jurisdiction vested u/s.482 of BNSS to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner,” the Court observed.
Thus, the Court has granted pre-arrest bail to Chidambaram on the condition that he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed, and shall not tamper evidence or try to influence or intimidate witnesses or involve himself in any other offence.
The bail application is moved by Advocates Benoj C. Augustine, Sabitha B., and Nayana Baiju.
Advocate Manoj G. Krishnan, public prosecutor, appeared for the State.
Case No: BA 464/2026
Case Title: Chidambaram S. Poduval v. Station House Officer
Click to Read/Download Order
