Kerala High Court
Jayan vs State Of Kerala on 7 July, 2025
2025:KER:49492
CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025
CRIME NO.425/2025 OF Chittur Police Station, Palakkad
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.05.2025 IN CRMP NO.549 OF 2025 OF
SPECIAL COURT-TRIAL OF OFFENCE UNDER SC/ST(POA)ACT1989, MANNARKKAD
APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:
1 JAYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, KALYANKULAMBU (H) NALLEPPILLY,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678553
2 SAROJINI, AGED 70 YEARS, W/O SWAMINATHAN
KALYANKULAMBU (H) NALLEPPILLY, CHITTUR TALUK,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678553
BY ADVS.
SHRI.T.K.SANDEEP
SMT.SWETHA R.
SMT.SREELAKSHMI SHIBU
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 PRABITHA, AGED 28 YEARS
W/O SUBASH, KAVILKULAM, MANNATHKAVU, THATHAMANGALAM,
CHITTUR, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678553
ADV.SMT.SEENA C-PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:49492
CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 2
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST Act'), challenging the order dated 19.05.2025 on the file of the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act, Mannarkkad in Crl.M.P. No.549 of 2025 in Crime No.425 of 2025 of Chittur Police Station, rejecting the application filed by the appellants for anticipatory bail, finding that since prima facie the offences punishable under the SC/ST Act have been committed, the appellants are not entitled to anticipatory bail.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the appellants are absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that, the 1st appellant had lent some amounts to the de facto complainant and when the 1 st appellant demanded repayment of the said amount, the husband of the de facto complainant trespassed into the house of the appellants and assaulted the 1st appellant, resulting in a fracture to his toe. It is submitted that, in order to get over the possibility of a case being registered against the husband of the de facto complainant, a false case alleging commission of offences 2025:KER:49492 CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 3 [including the offence under the SC/ST Act] have been registered against the appellants. It is submitted that, the appellants have no criminal antecedents and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellants may be granted anticipatory bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of anticipatory bail. It is submitted that, the de facto complainant had appeared before this Court on 02.07.2025 as the notice given to her by police mentions 02.07.2025 as the date of posting of this case. It is submitted that, the de facto complainant is strongly opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants. It is submitted that, according to the de facto complainant, there is no monetary transaction between the 1 st appellant and the de facto complainant and no scrap of paper is produced to show that there had been any monetary transaction between the 1st appellant and the de facto complainant. It is submitted that, the 1st appellant allegedly trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and sexually assaulted the de facto complainant and thus, he committed the offences alleged against him. It is submitted that, the investigation is at a preliminary stage and the grant of anticipatory bail to the 2025:KER:49492 CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 4 appellant, at this stage, may not be conducive to the investigation. It is submitted that, since there is a strong prima facie case, the bar of grant of anticipatory bail under the provisions of the SC/ST Act will operate against the 1 st appellant. It is also submitted that the 2 nd appellant is no longer an accused in the case.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that the 1st appellant can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. Since the name of the 2 nd appellant has already been deleted from the array of accused, it is not necessary to consider the case of the 2nd appellant for anticipatory bail. The 1st appellant does not have any criminal antecedents. According to him, there were financial transactions between him and the de facto complainant though there is nothing presently to indicate that such financial transaction was actually the basis for raising the allegations against the appellants. The fact that the 1st appellant has no criminal antecedents compels me to hold that the 1st appellant can be granted anticipatory bail. Even if the allegations are taken as true, it does not appear that the 1st appellant had any intention to commit any 2025:KER:49492 CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 5 offence under the SC/ST Act. Therefore, the 1 st appellant can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Therefore, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 19.05.2025 in Crl.M.P. No.549 of 2025 in Crime No.425 of 2025 of Chittur Police Station will stand set aside. It is directed that the 1st appellant shall be released on bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.425 of 2025 of Chittur Police Station subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The 1st appellant shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer;
(ii) The 1st appellant shall appear before the investigating officer at 11.00 A.M on 14.07.2025 and 15.07.2025 and thereafter, as and when called upon to do so;
(iii) The 1st appellant shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate the victim or any other family members of the victim or any witness in Crime No.425 of 2025 of Chittur police station;
2025:KER:49492 CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 6
(iv) The appellant shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.425 of 2025 of Chittur Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of bail I make it clear that the observations in this order are only for the purposes of considering the entitlement of the 1 st appellant for anticipatory bail and shall not be treated as a finding by this Court on any issue.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P. JUDGE ajt 2025:KER:49492 CRL.A NO. 990 OF 2025 7 APPENDIX OF CRL.A 990/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-I A TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT RECORDS OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE DOCTOR AMRITHA.T.S DATED 26.04.2025 Annexure-II A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 29.04.2025 FILED BY THE WIFE OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE SHO CHITTUR POLICE STATION