The Kerala High Court on Wednesday slammed businessman Boby Chemmanur for delaying to come out of jail after getting bail a day ago in a sexual harassment case filed by Malayalam actor Honey Rose, and warned him not to "play games" with the court.

Asserting that if bail was granted, it can be cancelled also, Justice P V Kunhikrishnan said the businessman's conduct was tantamount to "declaring war on the judiciary".

After the rebuke by the court, Chemmanur tendered an unconditional apology. Accepting his apology, the High Court closed the suo motu plea.

The High Court had also sought an explanation from Chemmanur as to why he did not come out of jail after getting bail. It said that the bail order was uploaded on its website by 4.08 pm on Tuesday and the release order was issued by 4.45 pm.

"Why was he retained in jail after that?" it said.

The prosecution told the High Court that the release order was not produced by Chemmanur's lawyers in the prison and that is why he was not let out.

The prosecution also told the court that the businessman claimed that he was not coming out as there were several remand prisoners in jail who could not come out despite getting bail as they did not have the money to execute the bond.

Displeased by the development, the HC said, "You (Chemmanur) need not take the vakalat of the remand prisoners. The High Court and the judiciary are there to take care of them. Don't play drama with the court." "He wants media attention and is creating stories by keeping the release order in his pocket. Why should his bail not be cancelled?" Justice Kunhikrishnan said that if he granted bail to the businessman, he can cancel it also.

"Do you (Chemmanur) think you are above the law? I can ask the police to arrest him and order that the probe be completed in two weeks," the judge said.

At 12 noon, when the matter was taken up again, the court continued to pull up the businessman, saying that his conduct was tantamount to "declaring war on the judiciary".

The court also said that Chemmanur's conduct was also an insult to the senior advocate who appeared for him on Tuesday and sought an urgent hearing of the bail plea.

"Who does he (Chemmanur) think he is? I know how to get him here. He is creating a drama. He is playing with the High Court. He is declaring war on the judiciary and saying that remand prisoners are stuck there. He thinks everyone can be purchased," Justice Kunhikrishnan said.

The court directed Chemmanur's lawyers to come at 1.45 pm with an answer as to whether he made any statement, before the media after his release, that he remained in jail to advocate the cause of the remand prisoners.

"If he did, I will issue a notice to cancel his bail. I will tell the police to complete the probe in two weeks and will direct the magisterial court to complete the trial in a month. He can stay in jail during that time," the judge said.

Subsequently, at 1.45 pm, his lawyers told the court that the release order reached the jail only in the morning and that is why the businessman could not come out earlier. They also told the court that Chemmanur had no intention of attracting media attention or insulting the court, by staying in jail.

The lawyers said that he was ready to tender an unconditional apology. They also said that he has agreed not to make statements with double meanings.

In view of the submissions by Chemmanur's lawyers, the court closed the case by accepting the apology by the businessman.

Chemmanur, after coming out from jail in the morning, told reporters that many inmates told him that they could not get out of prison despite getting bail as they did not have the money to execute the bond.

"When they came to me, I told them we can resolve the issue. I stayed back in jail one day only for that," he claimed. Granting relief to Chemmanur on Tuesday, Justice Kunhikrishnan, however, said,"body shaming is not acceptable in our society".

While granting him the relief, the court had also noted that prima facie it was of the opinion that "there are ingredients to attract the offences alleged against the petitioner (Chemmanur).

Chemmanur has been charged under Section 75(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for making "sexually coloured remarks" as a form of sexual harassment, as well as under Section 67 of the IT Act for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form.

The High Court had also noted that he used words "with double meanings". The businessman was arrested on January 8 and remanded to judicial custody on January 9.

According to the actor's complaint, upon invitation, she inaugurated the Chemmanur International Jewellery showroom at Alakode, Kannur, on August 7, 2024, where thousands had gathered to witness the event.

During the inauguration ceremony, Chemmanur placed a necklace around the actress's neck and then made unwelcome sexual advances with bad intentions, twirling or rotating her, the complaint has stated.

However, Chemmanur has stated that he is completely innocent of all the accusations levelled against him and denied the allegations, calling them false, baseless, and incorrect.

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.