SC grants anticipatory bail to Kochi IT entrepreneur in sexual assault case

Kochi: The Supreme Court on Thursday granted anticipatory bail to Venu Gopalakrishnan, an IT entrepreneur based in Kochi, in connection with a complaint filed by a former employee alleging sexual exploitation and criminal intimidation.

A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan made absolute the interim protection earlier granted to Gopalakrishnan while allowing the pre-arrest bail petition. The court directed that, in the event of arrest, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of ₹1 lakh along with two solvent sureties.

The apex court observed that the sexual assault complaint appeared to be a “counterblast” to an extortion case involving ₹30 crore previously filed by Gopalakrishnan against the complainant and her husband.

Highlighting the financial motives, the court noted: “The complainant and her husband were willing to accept ₹30 crore to bring quietus to their allegations". The court further added that “had the financial settlement been taken to its logical conclusion, no criminal proceedings would have been initiated”.

Gopalakrishnan has categorically denied all allegations, maintaining they are false, baseless, and motivated. He stated the charges are retaliatory, following the arrest of the complainant and her husband on July 29, 2025, for attempting to extort ₹30 crore from him.

According to his submission, following threats and demands, he initially agreed on July 24, 2025, to pay the amount in instalments, starting with an immediate transfer of ₹50,000.

 He subsequently filed an extortion complaint at the Ernakulam Central Police Station on July 28, 2025. The police apprehended the couple the following day at a hotel in Kochi.

During this operation, two cheques of ₹10 crore each were handed over to the couple under police instructions as part of a proposed settlement.

Gopalakrishnan argued that no allegations of sexual exploitation or intimidation were raised prior to this extortion incident, claiming the current complaint was filed with mala fide intent to exert pressure and damage his reputation. 

The de facto complainant was filed by an Executive Assistant at the IT firm between 2024 and 2025. Her complaint also names three other employees as co-accused, alleging they issued phone threats warning her of being framed in a “honey-trap” case if she proceeded with her complaint.

In September 2025, the Kerala High Court declined anticipatory bail to Gopalakrishnan while granting relief to the other employees. Represented by advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Thomas J Anakkallunkal, he then approached the Supreme Court.