The Kerala High Court on Monday quashed a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences case filed against activist Rehana Fathima, PTI reported. The case had been filed in 2020 after she circulated a video in which her children were seen painting on her semi-nude body. A single-judge bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath held that nudity should not by default be automatically assumed sexual, and must be considered in the appropriate context.

“Nudity should not be tied to sex,” Justice Edappagath said. “The mere sight of the naked upper body of the woman should not be deemed to be sexual by default.”

Justice Edappagath said that from the allegations against the 33-year-old activist, it was not possible to infer that the children were used for any simulated sexual acts and further so for sexual gratification. The judge added that Fathima had only used her body as a canvas for her children to paint on.

“The right of a woman to make autonomous decisions about her body is at the very core of her fundamental right to equality and privacy,” Justice Edappagath said, according to PTI. “It also falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.”

The court was hearing an appeal filed by Fathima against a trial court decision which had dismissed her plea to be discharged from the case. In the plea, she had asserted that her act was meant as a political statement against the default view of society that the naked upper body of the female is sexualised in all contexts, whereas the naked male upper body is not treated to this sexualisation.

In Monday’s judgement, the court agreed to Fathima’s argument and said that nude display of the upper body of men is never considered obscene or indecent, reported Bar and Bench.

“Body painting on men is an accepted tradition during ‘Pulikali’ festivals in Thrissur, Kerala,” Justice Edappagath said. “When ‘Theyyam’ and other rituals are performed at the temple, painting is conducted on the bodies of male artists. The male body is displayed in the form of six-pack abs, biceps etc. We often find men walking around without wearing shirts, but these acts are never considered to be obscene or indecent.”

The court added that some people are used to considering a woman’s naked body “as an overly sexualised one or just an object of desire”.

The judge also pointed out that nude female sculptures in temples and other public spaces are considered art or even holy, according to Bar and Bench. “Even though the idols of all goddesses are bare-chested, when one prays at the temple, the feeling is not of sexual explicitness but of divinity,” Justice Edappagath said in the order.