Special Court rejected anticipatory bail bar under SC/ST Act finding prima facie case, but held regular bail permissible. Court directed appellants to surrender and seek regular bail promptly before trial court.
Ordered surrender by Oct 25, 2022; directed Special Judge to consider regular bail application promptly with notice to Prosecutor and complainant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 21ST ASWINA, 1944
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 2022
CRM 3805/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT& SESSIONS COURT,PATHANAMTHITTA APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2:
1SREEKUMAR
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O.SOMAN PILLAI,
SREEVALSAM VEEDU, KURUMPAKARA.
ENADIMANGALAM, ENATHU, PATHANAMTHITTA., PIN - 691524
2ANEESH,
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.ASEEZ,
PARUVILA VEEDU, KURUMPAKARA,
ENADIMANGALAM, ENATHU, PATHANAMTHITTA., PIN - 691524
BY ADVS.
K.SUDHINKUMAR
P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
S.NITHIN (ANCHAL)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2RONA SANTHOSH
MAINAMON, KURUMPAKARA, ENADIMANGALAM, ENATHU,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 691526
R1 BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RENJITH
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
This appeal arises out of dismissal of bail application,
viz.,Crl.M.P.No.3805/2022, by the Special Judge, Pathanamthitta, under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘The SC/ST Act’ hereinafter), as per order dated 1.9.2022. The appellants are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the above case.
notice was issued to the de facto complainant through the Station House Officer and the Station House Officer produced document showing service of notice to the de facto complainant. But the de facto complainant did not turn up.
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 20223
Statement placed by the learned Public Prosecutor unfurls the prosecution case. It is alleged that on 15.8.2022 at about 8.30 p.m., when the de facto complainant was sitting at the veranda of shop at Kurumbakara in Enadimangalam village, the accused persons who do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community, came there in a motorbike and showed his vehicle’s light towards the face of the de facto complainant, when the de facto complainant questioned about the same the first accused abused obscene words and called the caste name of the de facto complainant, who belonged to Scheduled Caste Community and threatened him. On witnessing these overt acts, the friend of the de facto complainant intervened. Soon the second accused assaulted the friend of the de facto complainant and the second accused beat the de facto complainant with his hand. On the above facts, the prosecution alleges commission of offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 2022
4
SC/ST Act and dismissed the plea.
appellants are innocent and a minor offence has given the colour of serious offence under the ‘SC/ST Act’ and thereby, the appellants apprehend arrest at the hands of the investigating officer. Accordingly, the learned counsel submits that allegations are not serious and therefore, the appellants are liable to be released on bail and they are ready to be abide with any conditions as a prerequisite for granting anticipatory bail.
and therefore, grant of anticipatory bail is specifically barred under Section 18 and 18A of the SC/ST Act.
to find the commission of offence under the SC/ST Act, grant of anticipatory bail is barred. In this matter, in the FIS, the de facto complainant discloses use
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 20225
of abusive words against the de facto complainant, who belongs to Scheduled Caste community and causing simple hurt to him, by the accused, apart from calling and abusing the de facto complainant by calling his caste name, within public view. It is stated in the FIS that the accused are persons who do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. Thus, it could not be held at this stage that there is no prima facie case in this matter, so as to invoke power under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. However, facts remain is that abuse and causing simple hurt are the allegations though the same would attract offence under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Although, there is bar in granting anticipatory bail, there is no bar in granting regular bail to the appellants.
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 20226
for regular bail, the Special Judge, Pathanamthitta is directed to consider the bail application preferably on the date of surrender/production itself or without much delay, if the bail application will be filed with prior notice to the learned Public Prosecutor and the de facto complainant, with opportunity of hearing.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
Bb
CRL.A NO. 939 OF 2022
7
APPENDIX OF CRL.A 939/2022
PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-ITRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
606/2022 OF ENATHU POLICE
RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURESNIL
//True copy//
PA To Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when prima facie case for offences under SC/ST Act is evident based on FIR disclosures.
Whether allegations of abuse and simple hurt against a Scheduled Caste person barring regular bail despite Section 18A bar on anticipatory bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (UOI) & Ors.Referred¶31
Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India(UOI) & Ors., [ AIR 2020 SC 1036] · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 3 enactments
SREEKUMAR
ANEESH
STATE OF KERALA
RONA SANTHOSH
A. BADHARUDEEN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
A. BADHARUDEEN
Parties & counsel