Kerala High Court
Pramod. P vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2025
2025:KER:51643
CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 23RD ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025
CRIME NO.535/2024 OF Edathala Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.05.2025 IN Crl.MP NO.776 OF 2025
OF SPECIAL COURT FOR THE TRIAL OF OFFENCES UNDER SC/ST (POA)
ACT,1989, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
PRAMOD. P, AGED 39 YEARS
S/O PARTHAN PILLAI ,KARTHIKA PARIYARAM CHOONDI,
PUTHENCRUZ ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682308
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.V.VINAY
SRI.M.S.ANEER
SHRI.SARATH K.P.
SHRI.ANILKUMAR C.R.
SHRI.K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
SMT.DIPA V.
SHRI.AKASH CHERIAN THOMAS
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2025:KER:51643
CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 2
2 SREEJA KM, AGED 45 YEARS
W/O SETHUGOPAL G, RESIDING AT SREENIVAS HOUSE,
KALATHIPARAMBU, VATTEKUNNAM, EDAPPALLY, NORTH VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682024
SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN A,SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:51643
CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 3
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 24.05.2025 on the file of the Special Court for the trial of offences under SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 in Crl.M.C. No.776 of 2025, dismissing the application filed by the appellant for anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.535 of 2024 of Edathala Police Station. The appellant is the sole accused in Crime No.535 of 2024 of Edathala Police Station, which has been registered alleging commission of the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act.
2. The allegation against the appellant is that, while working as Vice-Principal of Bharat Mata School of Legal Studies, the appellant insulted the de facto complainant, who is also a teacher in the said institution, in public view since, she, as in-charge of the drama competition of the college, had permitted late night rehearsal without the permission of the appellant. It is also alleged that the appellant had humiliated 2025:KER:51643 CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 4 the de facto complainant by referring to her caste name.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent in the matter. It is submitted that, even going by the allegations, the appellant had only reprimanded the de facto complainant as a part of enforcing discipline in the college, which was his duty as the Vice- Principal. It is submitted that, the allegation that there was a casteist slur is false, and such an allegation has been raised only to incorporate an offence under the SC/ST Act against the appellant. It is submitted that, there has been no such allegation against the appellant hereinbefore. It is also pointed out that the allegations raised against the appellant are not sufficient to deny anticipatory bail. It is submitted that, even if all the allegations in the First Information Statement are taken as true, the appellant has not committed any offence under the SC/ST Act.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant. It is pointed out that, going by the allegations in the First Information Statement, the appellant had referred to the de facto complainant by her caste name and had even stated that she is engaged in such activities 2025:KER:51643 CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 5 only on account of her caste. It is submitted that, since there is a bar to the grant of anticipatory bail in offences relating to the SC/ST Act, this Court can grant anticipatory bail to the appellant only if this Court were to conclude that, prima facie, none of the offences under the SC/ST Act are attracted. Learned Public Prosecutor confirms that notice of the bail application has been served on the de facto complainant.
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the opinion that the appellant can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. The allegation against the appellant is that he had reprimanded the de facto complainant in his capacity as Vice- Principal of a college, in which the de facto complainant is also working. While the question as to whether the appellant had used any words, which would amount to an offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act, is a matter to be proved, the fact remains that the appellant had admittedly reprimanded the de facto complainant for having permitted the conduct of the drama rehearsal in the college premises beyond permitted hours. I am, therefore, of the opinion that, upon these allegations, denial of anticipatory bail to the appellant on 2025:KER:51643 CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 6 account of the provisions under the SC/ST Act may not be justified.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.05.2025 in Crl.M.P. No.776 of 2025 will stand set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.535 of 2024 of Edathala Police Station, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The 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 appellant shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.535 of 2024 of Edathala Police Station as and when called upon to do so;
(iii) The appellant shall not intimidate the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or attempt to influence or intimidate the de facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.535 of 2024 of Edathala police station;
(iv) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person 2025:KER:51643 CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 7 acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;
(v) The appellant shall not be involved in any other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.535 of 2024 of Edathala 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 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:51643 CRL.A NO. 962 OF 2025 8 APPENDIX OF CRL.A 962/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION BY THE COMPLAINANT ADDRESSED TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE COLLEGE DATED 01.02.2024 Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 10.01.2024 ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN COMMUNICATION DATED 14.03.2024 ADDRESSED TO THE DIRECTOR Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN COMMUNICATION DATED 19.07.2024 ADDRESSED TO THE PRINCIPAL Annexure 5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS IN CRIME NO. 535/2024 OF EDATHALA POLICE STATION Annexure 6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY POLICE SUPERINTENDENT, ALUVA