Pathanamthitta District Sessions Court on Wednesday granted bail to expelled Congress MLA Rahul Mamkootathil in a third sexual assault case, overturning a lower court’s earlier refusal.

Arrested in early January, the Palakkad legislator has previously obtained protection or bail in two similar cases.

The Pathanamthitta District Sessions Court on January 28 granted bail to Rahul Mamkootathil, MLA from Palakkad, in the third rape and criminal intimidation case registered against him, in a major development in the high‑profile legal saga.

The decision came on an appeal against a judicial magistrate’s earlier order that had refused him relief on grounds of the gravity of allegations and his “similar antecedents”.

In the latest case, registered on 8 January following a complaint by a woman from Kottayam district, Mamkootathil was charged under Sections 376 (rape) and 506(1) (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.

He was taken into custody by the Crime Branch on 11 January and remanded before the court.

Legal representatives for Mamkootathil argued that his detention was unnecessary pending trial and that procedural safeguards such as the right to liberty should be upheld.

The prosecution, while acknowledging the seriousness of the allegations, could not persuade the court to maintain custodial restrictions, leading to the bail order.

Observers say the ruling reflects the court’s careful balancing of due process with the public interest in the administration of justice.

The details of the bail conditions such as sureties or travel restrictions-remain under wraps in official filings, but it is understood that Mamkootathil will be released soon, having already obtained protections or bail in the earlier two cases.

Allegations, Arrest and Previous Proceedings

This third case is the latest in a series of serious complaints that have engulfed Mamkootathil since late 2025. The first complaint led to intervention by the Kerala High Court, which prevented his arrest temporarily, while a second resulted in anticipatory bail from a sessions court in Thiruvananthapuram.

The latest complaint alleged that Mamkootathil had made false promises of marriage and financial support, engaged in sexual relations, coerced a woman into terminating a pregnancy, and threatened her when matters turned acrimonious. This allegation drew intense public and political attention.

The Crime Branch’s Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been probing the third case, collecting evidence and interviewing witnesses. Mamkootathil’s legal team, in earlier hearings, asserted that the relationship was consensual and that he was unaware of the complainant’s marital status, a position he repeated during bail proceedings.

In the immediate aftermath of his arrest, Mamkootathil was remanded to a sub‑jail. Over subsequent hearings, his bail plea was initially dismissed by a magistrate’s court-prompting the appeal that ultimately led to release on bail.

The proceedings have featured intense courtroom exchanges, with defences challenging admissibility and authenticity of evidence including voice recordings and digital messages, and prosecutors emphasising the sensitivity of allegations involving sexual violence.

Political Fallout and Wider Controversies

The allegations against Mamkootathil have had significant political repercussions. The Kerala Congress suspended him from primary membership in August 2025, following mounting complaints of sexual misconduct by multiple women, and he later resigned as state Youth Congress chief.

By early December 2025, he was expelled from the party altogether, ahead of local body elections.

The controversies did not stop with the criminal cases. In December 2025, several individuals-including public activists and political leaders-were arrested or faced legal action for allegedly defaming the survivor in one of the cases on social media platforms.

This wider cloud of dispute underscores how the case has extended beyond legal mechanisms into social media and political arenas.

The Kerala government, in an earlier hearing related to the second rape case, told the High Court that delay in filing complaints should not weaken a survivor’s claims, highlighting the complex dynamics of trauma, stigma and reporting patterns in sexual assault cases.

Public opinion has been sharply divided, with social media discussions often reflecting contrasting viewpoints on consent, evidence, political bias, freedom of speech, and due process.

While some comment threads speculate about political motivations or media sensationalism, others stress the importance of thorough legal scrutiny and survivor support.

Voices and Official Statements

Official statements from the prosecution in court emphasised the “seriousness” of the allegations and the need to safeguard evidence and witness testimony.

Legal observers noted that courts across the hearings have frequently underscored the need to protect the integrity of the investigation while upholding fundamental rights.

Mamkootathil’s defence has publicly maintained his innocence, characterising the complaints as attempts to damage his reputation, and framing some of the evidence as lacking clarity or context-particularly digital communications whose authenticity has been contested.

Political figures across party lines have declined extended comment on individual bail matters, instead restating general commitments to fair investigations and judicial independence, mindful of the sensitivities around sexual offence allegations and potential influences on public discourse.

Legal and Social Implications

The case raises broader questions about how allegations of sexual violence involving public figures are investigated, prosecuted, and reported. It highlights the complex interplay between criminal justice procedures, media reporting and political accountability.

Cases involving high‑profile individuals often generate public debate on evidentiary standards, rights of the accused, and protections for survivors.

Kerala’s institutions, from the judiciary to law enforcement agencies, have been under scrutiny over their handling of evidence, bail petitions and procedural fairness.

Some legal analysts say the latest bail indicates a judiciary seeking to balance due process with efficient investigation, while others worry about perceptions of impunity when bail follows serious allegations.

The Logical Indian’s Perspective

At The Logical Indian, we believe that justice must be anchored in both compassion and constitutional principles. Allegations of sexual violence are deeply sensitive and demand respectful engagement with survivors, meticulous investigation, and fair trial procedures. Equally, every accused person is entitled to the presumption of innocence and due process under law.

This case illustrates the challenges faced by democratic societies as they navigate criminal justice, political consequences, media narratives and community responses.

A humane and balanced public dialogue – one that supports survivors without rushing to judgment, protects legal integrity, and rejects harassment in any form – is essential to strengthen public trust.