Kerala High Court
Jimmy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 25 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 3RD BHADRA, 1945
CRL.A NO. 1264 OF 2023
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C. NO.628/2023 OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR
THE TRIAL OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES ACT 1989, THODUPUZHA
DATED 07.08.2023 IN CRIME NO.703/2022 OF UPUTHARA POLICE STATION,
IDUKKI
APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3:
JIMMY JOSEPH
AGED 52 YEARS
(SENIOR GRADE FOREST DRIVER, IDUKKI WILDLIFE SANCTUARY)
S/O JOSEPH CHAKKO, VADAKKAN (H),
KAANJIYAAR P.O, PIN - 685511
BY ADVS.
V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR
PREEJA. P.VIJAYAN
SMITHA (EZHUPUNNA)
CHITRA JOHNSON
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 SARUNSAJI
S/O SAJIMON, PUTHENPURAKKAL,
KANNAMPADY MULLA BHAGAM, MATHAYIPPARA KARA,
UPPUTHARA VILLAGE, IDUKKI, PIN - 685505
PP - M P PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2023
This appeal has been filed under Section 14A of the
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter referred to as "the SC/ST
(POA) Act" for convenience) at the instance of the 3rd
accused in Crime No.703/2022 of Upputhara Police
Station, Idukki where the prosecution alleges commission
of offences punishable under Sections 120B, 167, 195,
204, 211, 341, 348, 465, 294(b), 506(i), 330 and 201
read with 34 of IPC as well as under Section 3(1)(P), 3(1)
(S), 3(2)(i), 3(2)(i)(ii), 3(2)(vii) and 3(2)(va) of the
SC/ST (POA) Act.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and
the learned Public Prosecutor. Though notice was served
upon the defacto complainant as mandated under Section
15 A(3) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and the learned Public
Prosecutor placed memo showing service of notice, the
defacto complainant did not appear.
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
3. The prosecution case runs on the premise that
the accused, in their capacity as Forest officials, had
inspected the autorickshaw of the second respondent at
the Vanmavu Checkpost in Kizhukkanam Section of Idukki
Wildlife Sanctuary at about 9.00 am on 20.09.2022. On
inspection, the second respondent was found carrying wild
animal meat in his autorickshaw. Thereupon, OR No.1 of
2022 was registered as per Form 1 and report submitted
to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattappana,
alleging commission of offences under Sections 9, 2(16),
2(20), 51(1), 57, 39(1)(6) and 39(3) and Section 429 IPC
r/w 34 IPC r/w Sec.56 of the Wild Life Protection Act and
Section 61(A) of the Kerala Forest Act. Accordingly, the
second respondent was arrested and later remanded to
judicial custody till 03.10.2022. Thereafter, as per
Annexure A8 order dated 26.09.2022, the custody of the
second respondent was given to the Forest Officer for one
day. The second respondent was later granted bail on
01.10.2022. The second respondent being a member of
the Scheduled Tribe, the tribal leaders and political parties
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
started agitations, alleging that the second respondent
was falsely implicated in O.R.No.1/2022 and he was
tortured by the forest officials. Much after the second
respondent's release, Annexure A1 crime was registered
against the appellant and twelve others. Even though
appellant moved an application for regular bail before the
Special Court, it was dismissed as per Annexure A6 order
viz. order in Crl.M.C. No.628/2023 dated 07.08.2023. Now
Annexure A6 order is under challenge in this appeal.
4. It is submitted submitted by the learned
counsel for the appellant that initially the anticipatory bail
plea at the instance of the appellant was dismissed by the
Special Court. Thereafter the appellant along with accused
Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6 to 8 filed bail application vide Crl.A.
No.817/2023 before this Court. While dismissing the
anticipatory bail plea at the instance of accused Nos. 1 to
3, this Court granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos. 4,
6, 7 and 8 by Annexure.A3 order. It is submitted by the
learned counsel for the appellant that there are change in
circumstances since the investigation has been completed.
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed grant of
bail and submitted that the investigation is going on where
arrest and custodial interrogation of the appellant are
necesssary. He also submitted that, this Court as per
Annexure.A3 order already dismissed the earlier appeal
filed by the appellant disallowing anticipatory bail at the
instance of accused Nos. 1 to 3, since arrest and custodial
interrogation of them are necessary in the facts of the
given case. The petition filed for the second time for
anticipatory bail before the Special Court after dismissal of
the appeal arising from the 1st order is misconceived and
the same could not be allowed. He also submitted that in
this matter, the bar under Section 18 and 18A of the
SC/ST (POA) Act would squarely apply.
6. Insofar as grant of anticipatory bail in crimes
involving offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act is
concerned, the law is well settled. Even after introduction
of Section 18A of the SC/ST Act by way of amendment,
the Apex Court held in Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of
India(UOI) & Ors., [AIR 2020 SC 1036] that when the
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
prosecution allegations if constitute prima facie materials
to find the commission of offence under the SC/ST Act,
grant of anticipatory bail is barred.
7. On perusal of Annexure.A3 order, this Court
considered the seriousness of the offence in paragraph No.
8 of the order and found that accused Nos. 1 to 3 cannot
be released on anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory
bail to accused Nos. 4, 6, 7 and 8. There is no change in
the circumstances since investigation of the crime alleging
serious offences is continuing, where prosecution case is
well made out against the 3rd accused and as such grant of
anticipatory bail is bared under Section 18 and 18A of the
SC/ST (POA) Act.
8. Therefore, dismissal of the 2nd bail application
by the Special Judge is perfectly in order. The same does
not require any interference at the hands of this Court.
Accordingly, the criminal appeal stands dismissed.
The appellant/3rd accused is directed to
surrender before the Investigating Officer within three
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
days from today. On failure to surrender, as directed, the
Investigating Officer is directed to arrest the appellant/3rd
accused and proceed with the investigation, without fail.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
SK
JUDGE
Crl.A No. 1264 of 2023
APPENDIX OF CRL.A 1264/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 703/2022 OF
UPPUTHARA POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF FORM NO.1 UNDER SECTION 52 OF
KERALA FOREST ACT 1961 IN OR NO. 1/2002,
FILED BEFORE JFCM COURT, KATTAPANA
ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRL APPEAL NO:
817/2023 DATED 27.06.2023
ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED
29.05.2023
ANNEXURE A5 MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF NEURO SURGERY DATED 22/06/2023
ANNEXURE A6 FREE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.8.2023 IN
CRL.MC NO: 628/2023 OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR
THE TRIAL OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF
ATROCITIES) ACT 1989, THODUPUZHA
ANNEXURE A7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN CRL.APPL NO
1157/2022 DATED 9.12.2022
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES : NIL
