IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
XXX – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
Crl.A No. 855, 875 of 2022
Decided on : 20-10-2022
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 438 - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va), 18 and 18-A - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 354 A(2), 354A(1)(ii), 354 D(2) - Appeal - No enquiry or approval required – Granting anticipatory bail - Punishments for offences of atrocities - whether a prima facie case is made out alleging commission of offences under Section 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC/ST Act, the said case is specifically made out - Whether an accused committed offence under Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act after trial, word "knowing" or `knowledge', has to be found on basis of evidence tendered - Offence alleged to be committed by accused under Section 354 of I.P.C is one in the schedule and commission of offence under Section 354 of I.P.C would attract offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, if knowledge is foreseeable. (Para 37).
Findings of the Court :
It is to be observed that in cases involving serious offences under SC/ST Act where anticipatory bail is specifically barred by statute, mere illness of accused is not a ground for granting anticipatory bail against mandate of statute, where custodial interrogation or medical test etc., are necessary in particular - However, illness, if any, can be considered by Investigating Officer, if accused be arrested, for giving proper medical aid - Therefore, Such an order would suffice to address the ailments canvassed by accused on basis of medical documents.
Result: Appeals allowed.
JUDGMENT :
“DURALEX SEDLEX” – the law is hard but it is the law.”
In these appeals this Court is called upon to address the impact of legal bar in granting pre-arrest bail in cases under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [hereinafter referred to as `the SC/ST Act' for convenience].
2. The defacto complainant in Crime No.483/2022 of Koyilandy Police Station is the appellant in Crl.Appeal No.855/2022 and the respondents herein are State of Kerala as well as the accused in the above crime. The challenge raised in this appeal is against order granting anticipatory bail to the accused, as per order in Crl.M.C.No.1221/2022 dated 2.8.2022 by the learned Special Judge, Kozhikode, under the SC/ST Act.
3. Crl.Appeal No.875/2022 is at the instance of the State of Kerala challenging the same order. In this appeal, the 1st respondent is the accused and 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant.
4. I shall refer the parties in these appeals as `defacto complainant', `accused' and `prosecution', hereinafter for brevity and easy reference.
5. Heard Advocate K.V.Bhadrakumari, the learned counsel for the appellant/defacto complainant in Crl.Appeal No.855/2022, Advocate K.Nandini appearing for the 2nd respondent/the defacto complainant in Crl.A.No.875/2022, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, Sri T.R.Ranjith, as well as Advocate Nirmal.S, who appeared for the accused and the 2nd respondent in Crl.Appeal No.855/2022 and the 1st respondent in Crl.Appeal No.875/2022.
6. The case diary produced by the learned Public Prosecutor is perused. The same unfurls the prosecution case. Precisely the allegation as could be read out from the case diary is that at 6.30 a.m on 17.04.2022 the accused (who does not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community) forcefully kissed the defacto complainant (who belongs to a Scheduled Caste community) on the rear side of her neck and thereby intentionally touched the defacto complainant, knowing that she belongs to a Scheduled Caste community, without the consent of the defacto complainant and thereby outraged her modesty. On the above facts, the prosecution alleges commission of offences under Sections 354 A(2), 354A(1)(ii), 354 D(2) of the Indian Penal Code (for short `I.P.C' hereinafter) and under Section 3(2)(va) and 3(1) (w)(i) of the SC/ST Act.
7. The accused, who apprehended arrest at the hands of Koyilandy police, set forth pre-arrest bail plea before the learned Special Judge. The learned Special Judge appraised the same and passed the impugned order whereby the learned Special Judge granted anticipatory bail to the accused.
8. Before addressing the rival arguments, I am inclined to extract the operative portion of the order of bail as under.
(i) The accused shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-with two solvent sureties for the like sum in case of arrest by the SHO, Koyilandy Police Station.”
9. While concluding the finding in para.17 of the impugned order, the learned Special Judge observed as under:
Dr.Subhash Kashi Nath Mahajan v. The State of Maharashtra
Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India(UOI) & Ors.
Shakuntla Devi v. Baljinder Singh
Vilas Pandurang Pawar & anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Satpal Singh v. State of Haryana
Required knowledge of accused that defacto complainant is a member of Scheduled Caste is well discernible from materials available as ascribed in Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.
While considering any application seeking pre-arrest bail, High Court has to balance two interests: i.e. that the power is not so used as to convert jurisdiction into that under Section 438 of Crimin....
Section 18 bar on anticipatory bail under SC/ST Act applies only where prima facie offence of caste-based humiliation in public view established; absent specific allegations against family members, b....
Anticipatory bail can be granted despite statutory bars if allegations do not establish a prima facie case under the relevant act.
(1) Anticipatory bail application is maintainable in SC/ST Act offences in a given case.(2) In matter of grant of anticipatory bail there is no distinction whether a person apprehends arrest at hands....
Rape allegations cannot arise from a consensual relationship that later diminishes due to a breakup; prima facie evidence is required for legal action under the SC/ST Act.
Pre-arrest bail – In relation to any case involving arrest of a person who is facing accusation about committing offence under SC/ST Act,1989, protection of Section 438, Cr.P.C. would not be availabl....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.