Allowed

Midhun Nair v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Aug 2018CRL.A/1003/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam allowed a criminal appeal against bail rejection in a case involving scheduled caste offences and grievous hurt. The court clarified that Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act is a sentencing enhancement provision, not a substantive offence. Concluding that the investigation was complete and the main charge was non-bailable, the court granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dismissing bail is set aside. Accused persons are released on bail on executing a bond with two sureties for Rs. 50,000 each.

Midhun Nair Vs State of Kerala — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 26TH SRAVANA, 1940

¶5

CRL.A.No. 1003 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 2739/2018 of SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR DATED 04-08-2018

¶7

CRIME NO.313 /2018 OF Anthikkad Police Station, Thrissur

¶8

APPELLANT/S/ACCUSED Nos.1, 2 AND 4:

¶9

1 MIDHUN NAIR, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.RAGHUNANDAN, KANNANKULANGARA HOUSE, CHAZOOR, ALAPAD

¶10

THRISSUR. (ACCUSED No.1)

¶11

2 VAISHAKH @ PATTIPALLAN, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.UNNICHEKAN, KONDORU HOUSE, CHETTAKKULAM, CHAZHOOR, THRISSUR (ACCUSED No.2)

¶12

3 PRAVEESH @ PRAVI, AGED 18 YEARS, S/O.PRADEEP, KOTTEKKAD HOUSE,

¶13

CHETTAKKULAM, CHAZHOOR, THRISSUR (ACCUSED No.4)

¶14

BY ADV. VINAY RAMDAS

¶15

RESPONDENT/S:

¶16

STATE OF KERALA

¶17

REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF ANTHIKAD POLICE STATION IN THRISSUR DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.K.PRASAD

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.08.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

CRL.A.No. 1003 of 2018

¶21

-: 2 :-

¶22

JUDGEMENT

¶23

The appellants herein are the accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in

¶24

Crime No.313/2018 of the Anthikad Police Station, involving the offences under Sections 451, 323, 324 and 341 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, and under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act. They have been in judicial custody since their arrest, on 17/4/2018. Their application for regular bail was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur on 4.8.2018, and so, they have come up in appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST (PoA) Act.

¶25

On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the

¶26

materials, I find that the petitioners must be released on bail. That they are involved in other crimes is not a ground to deny bail, if the offence is bailable under the law. Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act does not contain any

¶27

substantive offence. It is only a provision ensuring adequate sentence in the case of some scheduled offences. The main offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 324 IPC. It appears that the learned Sessions Judge denied bail on a misapprehension that Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act contains a substantive offence.

¶28

CRL.A.No. 1003 of 2018

¶29

-: 3 :-

¶30

I find no reason to deny bail to the petitioners in

¶31

the present circumstances. They have been in custody for four months. The impugned order shows that investigation is over, and the police has submitted final report on 21.5.2018. If so, there is no reason to deny bail to the accused.

¶32

In the result, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Crl.M.P. No.2739/2018 is set aside, and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing bond with two sureties

¶33

for `50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the court below.

¶34

Bail is granted on condition that the petitioners shall not in any manner try to influence or win over the witnesses, and they shall not have any contact with the material witnesses directly or over telephone or otherwise.

Sd/-

P.UBAID

Judge

Jvt/17.8.2018

//True copy//

P.A. To Judge

Midhun Nair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Midhun Nair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.J.Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Kerala

T.G. Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Sharon.a.S Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Noushadali

Vijayan P.T. Vs State of Kerala