Dismissed

Jaaz Nalil Pothen v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Dec 2020Bail Appl./5923/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala rejected the plea for anticipatory bail under the embargo of Sections 18 and 18A of the Atrocities Act. The court directed the applicants to surrender within two weeks and apply for regular bail upon arrest.

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to surrender before IO within two weeks; liberty to apply for regular bail upon arrest to be considered on the same day.

Jaaz Nalil Pothen Vs State of Kerala — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.5923 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.1757/2020 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 JAAZ NALIL POTHEN, AGED 31 YEARS, USHAVILLA, MANJADI P.O, THIRUVALLA PATHANAMTHITTA PIN-689105

¶9

2 GIREESHKUMAR P M, AGED 30 YEARS, PUTHIRIKATTUMALAYIL, MANJADI P.O, THIRUVALLA PIN-689105

¶10

3 BIBIN K MATHEW, AGED 27 YEARS, KANNASANATTU (H), CHUMATHRA P.O, THIRUVALLA PIN-689103

¶11

4 BIJOY P GEEVARGHESE, AGED 27 YEARS, PUTHENPARAMBIL (H), KALLUMKAL P.O, THIRUVALLA PIN-689102

¶12

5 BONNY MATHEW, AGED 28 YEARS, THOTTADIYIL (H), MANJADI P.O, THIRUVALLA PIN-689105

¶13

B.A.No.5923 OF 2020

¶14

¶15

6 DERIN T WILLIAM, AGED 25 YEARS, THYCATTIL BETHEL BHAVAN, MANJADI P.O, THIRUVALLA PIN-689105 7 JEKKU JACOB, AGED 25 YEARS, POYEPPATTIL (H), KUTTOOR P.O, THIRUVALLA PIN-689106 BY ADV. SRI.S.DHEERENDRAKUMAR

¶16

RESPONDENTS:

¶17

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031 2 VISHAK KUMAR P T AGED 33 YEARS PUTHUVAL (H), VENPALA P.O, KUTTOOR,THIRUVALLA PIN-689102 3 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA AGED 50 YEARS OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE THIRUVALLA PIN-689101 4 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CDAC, AGED 50 YEARS P.B.NO.6520, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695033 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SRI.B.JAYASURYA – SR.PP

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

B.A.No.5923 OF 2020

¶21

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Dated this the 03^rd day of December, 2020

¶24

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶25

The applicants are accused Nos. 1 to 7 in Crime
No. 1757 of 2020 of Thiruvalla Police Station,
Pathanamthitta, for having allegedly committed offences
punishable under Sections 143, 149, 323 and 294(b) r/w
Section 149 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(S) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (hereinafter referred to as “Atrocities Act”). The
prosecution case in brief, is this:

¶26

2.The applicants, who were members of an unlawful
assembly and in prosecution of the common objection of the
said unlawful assembly, they assaulted the defacto
complainant, a member of the Scheduled Caste community
knowing fully well that he is a member of the Scheduled
Caste. It is submitted by the applicants that the allegations

¶27

B.A.No.5923 OF 2020

¶28

¶29

are not true and that they have the video footages of the
incident which indicates that the allegations made against
them are probably false and frivolous. It is further submitted
that the applicants are innocent and therefore, they may be
granted anticipatory bail.

¶30

3.Notice was issued to the defacto complainant, but
he has not yet appeared.

¶31

4.The learned counsel insists on the hearing of the
application on merits in the absence of the defacto
complainant. The embargo under Section 18 and 18A of the
Atrocities Act prevents this Court from entertaining an
application for anticipatory bail where prima facie, there is
an offence of an assault made on a member of the
Scheduled Caste by a person, who is not a member of the
Scheduled Caste. Admittedly, none of the applicants are
members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and
the defacto complainant on the other hand is a member of
the Scheduled Caste. He is also not disputed.

¶32

Hence, the embargo applies, and are therefore,
the applicants are directed to surrender before the

¶33

B.A.No.5923 OF 2020

¶34

¶35

Investigating Officer within two weeks. After interrogation,
in the event of their being arrested, they shall be produced
before the jurisdictional court where they are at liberty to
apply for a regular bail which shall be considered and
disposed of preferably on the very same day.

¶36

 Sd/-
 ASHOK MENON
 JUDGE

¶37

NR/03/12/2020

Jaaz Nalil Pothen v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaaz Nalil Pothen 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

Raju Antony Vs State of Kerala

Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Chris Sebastian Vs State of Kerala

Thasleem Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Vs State of Kerala