Back
2009 Supreme(Ker) 779
High Court Of Kerala
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T. SANKARAN
K.Sudhish - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor - Respondents
B.A.Nos.2785 of 2009, 2786 & 3757 of 2009
Decided On : 24 September 2009
The central legal point established in the judgment is the detrimental impact of communal disharmony on society and the need for remedial measures to contain such disharmony.
Headnote:
Section 438 - Anticipatory Bail - Indian Penal Code - Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 324, 427, 354, 153-A, 149
Fact of the Case:
The bail applications were for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused were involved in communal clashes between Hindus and Muslims in Kasaragod District, with allegations of unlawful assembly, assault, and promoting disharmony between different religions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the communal disharmony in Kasaragod District was increasing, and the delay in disposal of cases involving communal offenses was detrimental to society. The court emphasized the need for remedial measures and concrete steps to contain communal disharmony.
Issues: The issues involved communal clashes between Hindus and Muslims, delay in disposal of cases, and the impact of communal disharmony on society.
Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted the importance of unity in diversity, equal rights for all citizens regardless of religion, and the detrimental effects of communal disharmony on the nation's development. The court also emphasized the need for speedy consideration of granting sanction for cases involving communal offenses.
Final Decision: The bail applications were dismissed, and the court communicated the order to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Kerala for appropriate action.
These bail applications for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are being disposed of by this common Order since common questions are involved therein.
2. Bail Application No.2785 of 2009 relates to Crime No.252 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station. The petitioners are accused Nos.4,5,7 and 6 respectively. The offences alleged against the accused are under Section 143,147,148,452,324,427,354,153-A, read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that on 5-4-2009 at 19 Hours, about 20 identifiable persons, who belong to Hindu religion, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with weapons, and committed trespass into the house of the de facto complainant in Kudu village in Kasaragod Taluk, assaulted the defacto complainant and his daughter and caused damage to the house of the de facto
complainant. It is alleged that the accused persons acted in a manner promoting disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religions. The accused persons proclaimed that they would not allow any Muslim to live in the locality.
3. Accused Nos.3,4,5,7, 6 and 8 in Crime No. 253 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station are the petitioners in Bail Application No.2786 of 2009. They are in the array of accused persons in Crime No.252 of 2009 as well. The incident occurred at 6.30 PM on 5.4.2009 in Kudlu village in Kasaragod Taluk. The allegations are almost similar in nature as in Crime No.252 of 2009. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 427, 153-A read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused persons are Hindus, while the victims are Muslims.
4. The petitioner in Bail Application No.3757 of 2009 is accused No.6 in Crime No.339 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station. The accused persons are alleged to have committed offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 324, 427, 354, 153-A, read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that on 7-5-2009 at 21.15 hours, the accused persons, twenty in number and who are Hindus, with an intention to commit murder of the de facto complainant and others, who are Muslims, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and attacked the de facto complainant and others with deadly weapons like knife, hook etc. The incident occurred at Olayathadka in Madhur village in Kasaragod Taluk. The allegation is that while the de facto complainant and his friends were coming back after attending a wedding, the accused persons retrained them and asked whether they are not Muslims. The accused persons attacked them stating that no Muslim would be allowed to live in the locality. The de facto complainant and his friends sustained injuries.
5. The petitioners in Bail Application Nos.2785 and 2786 of 2009 state that they are workers of Bharitiya Janata Party. They state that there existed political clashes in the locality between BJP, Muslim League and Indian National League.
6. When the Bail Applications came up for hearing, it was felt expedient to get a report from the District superintendent of Police, Kasaragod in respect of the cases relating to communal clashes in Kasaragod District, as several cases of similar nature came up for consideration, where the accused persons belonged either to Hindu community or
Muslim community in Kasaragod Taluk. In one such case (B.A.No.2917 of 2009), a person belonging to Hindu community was restrained and attacked by the accused persons belonging to Muslim community on the ground that the de facto complainant therein happened to walk, wearing a saffron coloured dress, in an area predominantly inhabited by Muslims. The de facto complainant had put sindur on his forehead. It was alleged that the accused attacked the de facto complainant stating that no person would be allowed to enter the place wearing such dress in saffron colour and sindur on his forehead. In another case (B.A.No.2311 of 2009), while the de facto complaina
