The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday refused to quash the First Information Report (FIR) against Bengaluru International Airport Limited (BIAL) ground staff member Mohammed Affan Ahamed, who is accused of sexually harassing a South Korean passenger at Kempegowda International Airport on January 19. Justice Nagaprasanna dismissed Ahamed’s plea, citing the seriousness of the allegations outlined in the FIR.
According to court records, Ahamed had approached the High Court seeking relief from criminal proceedings filed under BNS Section 75 (1) (i). Justice Nagaprasanna, while reading the FIR details, questioned Ahamed’s conduct, saying: “At the immigration, you took a South Korean lady and made her stand in a ‘T-position.’ What sort of an officer are you? Should you be spared?” The court subsequently dismissed the petition.
The incident reportedly occurred after the passenger had completed security checks and immigration procedures. As she walked toward the boarding lounge, Ahamed allegedly stopped her, claiming she needed to be rechecked. He is accused of leading her to a location near the men’s washroom, physically frisking her, and making inappropriate contact before letting her go. The victim immediately reported the incident to airport security personnel.
CISF authorities at Kempegowda International Airport reviewed CCTV footage, identified Ahamed, and handed him over to the police. Following the incident, BIAL suspended him from duty pending investigation. The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) clarified that airport staff do not have the authority to physically frisk passengers, even if they suspect suspicious activity. Any security concerns must be reported to CISF personnel.
The case highlights the strict protocols in place for passenger safety at airports, particularly regarding gender-sensitive procedures. Experts note that physical searches of passengers are strictly regulated, and violations can lead to both criminal and administrative actions against airport staff.
Ahamed now faces ongoing criminal proceedings, and the High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR underscores the judiciary’s stance on upholding passenger safety and accountability of airport personnel. Further investigation is underway, and the outcome could influence security practices at airports across the region.