Supreme Court relief for tech CEO in rape case by ex staffer

Weather ePaper Today’s Paper Journalism of Courage Home ePaper Politics Explained Opinion India Business Premium Cities UPSC Entertainment Sports World Lifestyle Tech Subscribe Sign In TrendingUPSC OfferIPL 2026US NewsPuzzles & GamesLegal NewsFresh TakeHealthResearch🎙️ Podcast Advertisement function checkAndLoadWindowSizeScript() { if (window.jQuery) { // jQuery is loaded, include your script jQuery(document).ready(function($) { // Your existing script for checking window width if (window.innerWidth) var page_w = window.innerWidth; else if (document.all) var page_w = document.body.clientWidth; if (page_w > 1024) { $(".add-left, .add-right").show(); } else { $(".add-left, .add-right").hide(); } }); } else { // jQuery is not loaded, check again after 0.2 seconds setTimeout(checkAndLoadWindowSizeScript, 200); } } // Initial call to the function checkAndLoadWindowSizeScript(); NewsLegalSupreme Court relief for tech CEO in rape case by ex staffer Supreme Court relief for tech CEO in rape case by ex staffer In their complaint, the couple also alleged that Balakrishnan transferred Rs 50,000 to her bank account as part of a conspiracy to entrap them. By: Express News Service3 min readNew DelhiApr 17, 2026 04:18 AM IST The apex court noted in its Thursday order that based on the documents submitted by the accused, “a sum of Rs 30 crore was to be paid by the appellant to the complainant and her husband in tranches of Rs 10 crores each”. Make us preferred source on Google Whatsapp twitter Facebook Reddit PRINT The Supreme Court on Thursday granted anticipatory bail to Venu Balakrishnan, CEO of a Kochi-based IT firm, in a rape and sexual harassment case filed by his former employee. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan directed that he be released on bail in case of arrest, on a cash security of Rs 1 lakh and two like sureties. On December 5, 2025, a bench presided by Justice Nagarathna had urged the victim and the accused for settlement, referring them to the SC mediation centre. But the court heard the matter on merits as the attempt failed. Appearing for appellant Balakrishnan, who was earlier refused relief by the Kerala High Court, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi said that the woman and her husband had earlier sought a financial settlement worth Rs 30 crore in July 2025. He claimed it was only after the settlement failed that the proceedings were initiated against the accused. The complainant alleged that she was “repeatedly sexually harassed at the workplace… by sending obscene messages and explicit videos, making indecent proposals, and threatening to terminate employment if the proposals were refused. In spite of repeated internal complaints, there was no action… The complaints were later withdrawn under pressure and on the assurance that the misconduct would not be repeated. However, the harassment continued, compelling her to resign and take legal recourse”. Refuting the extortion allegations, the complainant said she and her husband were asked to meet senior company employees at a hotel on July 29, 2025, where police officers “acting at the bidding of the accused” arrested them and seized their devices. She claimed a seizure mahazar was only prepared on August 5, by when the contents of the devices “may have been tampered with”. In their complaint, the couple also alleged that Balakrishnan transferred Rs 50,000 to her bank account as part of a conspiracy to entrap them. The apex court noted in its Thursday order that based on the documents submitted by the accused, “a sum of Rs 30 crore was to be paid by the appellant to the complainant and her husband in tranches of Rs 10 crores each”. Justice Nagarathna, writing for the bench, said, “In other words, they were willing to accept the amount to be paid by the appellant so as to bring about a quietus to their allegations against the appellant herein and to end all disputes between them.” Meanwhile, the state government had opposed the bail plea saying the allegations were serious and warranted custodial interrogation. It added that the accused could intimidate the witnesses as he was a “person of considerable influence and resources”. The Kerala High Court had on September 11, 2025 refused to give Balakrishnan anticipatory bail saying the alleged offences were “very serious”. The HC however had granted pre-arrest bail to the other co-accused, Jacob P Thampy, Eby Paul and Bimalraj Haridas. Balakrishnan then approached the apex court. On September 26, the court directed that no coercive steps be taken against him in the interim. The FIR against the accused includes offences punishable under Sections 351(2) (criminal intimidation), 64 (rape), 74 (outraging modesty of woman), 75 (sexual harassment) and 79 (insulting woman’s modesty) read with Section 3(5) (common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and Section 67A (transmitting sexually explicit acts) of the Information Technology Act.