Kerala High Court
Marakkar K.M vs Chandran on 22 June, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1945
CRL.A NO. 659 OF 2023
Crl.MP 54/2023 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST ATROCITIES ACT
CASES, THRISSUR
APPELLANT/S:
1 ABBAS P.A.
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. ABOOBACKER, PLACKALPEEDIKAYIL
HOUSE,KILLIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN -
680591
2 IBRAHIM P.A.,
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O. ABOOBACKER, PLACKALPEEDIKAYIL
HOUSE,KILLIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN -
680591
3 ALTHAF,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O. YOUSEF, PLACKALPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, KILLIMANGALAM
P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 680591
BY ADV C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
CHELAKKARA POLICE STATION, CHELAKKARA P.O., THRISSUR
DISTRICT,, PIN - 680586
3 MR. SANTHOSH,
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O. CHANDRAN, NAMBAZHIPADI HOUSE, VETTIKKATTIL,
NEDUMPURA VILLAGE, CHERUTHURUTHI, THRISSUR
DISTRICT,, PIN - 679531
BY ADVS.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Ramesh P
OTHER PRESENT:
PP M.C.ASHI; SR.PPRENJITH GEORGE
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.06.2023, ALONG WITH CRL.APPEAL NO.666/2023 AND CON.CASES,
THE COURT ON 22.06.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
-2-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1945
CRL.A NO. 666 OF 2023
Crl.MP 54/2023 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST ATROCITIES ACT
CASES, THRISSUR
APPELLANT/S:
KAFEER @ KABEER
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. MOHAMMED, MUNDANATTU PEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
KILLIMANGALAM POST, KILLIMANGALAM,, PIN - 680591
BY ADVS.
C.P.UDAYABHANU
NAVANEETH.N.NATH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
CHELAKKARA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR., PIN - 680586
3 SANTHOSH
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O. CHANDRAN, NAMBAZHIPADI HOUSE, VETTIKKATTIL,
NEDUMPURA VILLAGE, CHERUTHURUTHI, THRISSUR., PIN -
679531
BY ADVS.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Ramesh P
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.06.2023, ALONG WITH CRL.APPEAL NO.659/2023 AND CON.CASES,
THE COURT ON 22.06.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
-3-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1945
CRL.A NO. 672 OF 2023
Crl.MP 57/2023 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST ATROCITIES ACT
CASES, THRISSUR
APPELLANT/S:
1 MARAKKAR K.M
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED, KURUKKAN MOOCHIKKAL HOUSE,
KILLIMANGALAM POST, KILLIMANGALAM, THRISSUR, PIN
- 680591
2 PADMANABHAN
S/O GOVINDHANKUTTY, KOLAZHY HOUSE, KILLIMANGALAM
POST, KILLIMANGALAM, THRISSUR, PIN - 680591
3 NIYAS P.U
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O UMMER, PADINJARA PEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
KILLIMANGALAM POST, KILLIMANGALAM, THRISSUR, PIN
- 680591
4 NOUFEL A S
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. SULAIMAN, ALUKKAPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
KILLIMANGALAM POST, KILLIMANGALAM, THRISSUR, PIN
- 680591
BY ADVS.
RAHUL SUNIL
P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)
P.M.RAFIQ
M.REVIKRISHNAN
AJEESH K.SASI
SRUTHY N. BHAT
SRUTHY K.K
NIKITA J. MENDEZ
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
-4-
RESPONDENT/S:
1 CHANDRAN
AGED 67 YEARS
S/O KUNJAN, NAMBAZHIPADI HOUSE, VETTIKKATRI
DESOM, NEDUMPURA VILLAGE, CHERUTHURUTHY,
THRISSUR, PIN - 679531
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV Ramesh P
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.06.2023, ALONG WITH CRL.APPEAL NO.666/2023 AND CON.CASES,
THE COURT ON 22.06.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
-5-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1945
CRL.A NO. 707 OF 2023
Crl.MP 73/2023 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST ATROCITIES ACT
CASES, THRISSUR
APPELLANT/S:
SULAIMAN A.M.
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O. MUHAMMED, ALOOKKAPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
KILLIMANGALAM POST, CHELAKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680506
BY ADVS.
NIKITA J. MENDEZ
P.M.RAFIQ
M.REVIKRISHNAN
AJEESH K.SASI
SRUTHY N. BHAT
RAHUL SUNIL
SRUTHY K.K
P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 CHANDRAN
AGED 67 YEARS
S/O. KUNJAN, NAMBHAZIPADI HOUSE, VETTIKKATRI DESOM,
NEDUMPURA VILLAGE, CHERUTHURUTHY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 679531
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV Ramesh P
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.06.2023, ALONG WITH CRL.APPEAL NO.666/2023 AND CON.CASES,
THE COURT ON 22.06.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
-6-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2023
The appellants are accused Nos.1 to 4 and 6,
7 and 9 to 11 of Chelakkara Police Station,
registered for offences punishable under Sections
323, 324, 341, 308 r/w 34 of IPC, and Section
3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The crime
is registered on the allegation that, late into
the night on 15.04.2023, the third respondent was
found in the backyard of the first appellant's
house under suspicious circumstances. Thereupon,
the appellants and other accused apprehended the
third respondent and assaulted him brutally
before handing him over to the police. The third
respondent, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste,
sustained grievous injuries in the incident. The
appellants were arrested on various dates between
16.04.2023 and 20.04.2023 and are continuing in
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
custody. Even though the appellants approached
the Special Court, their bail applications were
rejected considering the heinous nature of their
action. Hence, these appeals.
2. Learned Counsel for the appellants, led
by Senior Advocate P.Vijaya Bhanu, made the
following submissions;
The first appellant is engaged in the
business of procurement and sale of arecanuts.
There were frequent instances of theft of
arecanuts from the first appellant's residential
premises. Therefore, at the direction of the
police, CCTV cameras were installed around the
compound. On 15.04.2023, image of the third
respondent, standing inside the compound under
suspicious circumstances, was captured by the
cameras. On seeing this, the first appellant
went outside and attempted to apprehend the third
respondent, but the third respondent resisted the
attempt. On hearing the hue and cry, the other
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
accused, who are living in and around the house
of the first appellant, rushed to the spot and
after subduing the third respondent, tied him
with a rope and informed the police. After
reaching the spot, the Chelakkara Police
registered Crime No.214 of 2023 against the third
respondent for the offence under Section 511 of
379 IPC. The crime in which the appellants are
made accused, was registered thereafter. Even
going by the prosecution allegation, the
appellants have only exercised their right of
private defence. The offence under the SC/ST
(PoA) Act is in no way attracted, the third
respondent being a total stranger to the
appellants and had come over to Killimangalam for
the purpose of committing theft. As such, there
cannot be an assumption that the appellants had
assaulted the third respondent with the knowledge
that he is a member of the Scheduled Caste.
3. Adv.P.Ramesh, learned Counsel for the
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
third respondent, opposed the bail applications,
pointing out that his client was so brutally
assaulted that he is not even in a position to
speak after two months. It is submitted that the
third respondent had fainted by the time the
police came to the spot. He was taken to the
Taluk Hospital, Chelakkara and from there,
referred to the Medical College Hospital,
Thrissur. The third respondent had to undergo
emergent brain surgery and was in ventilator for
a long time. A copy of the discharge summary
issued from the Department of Neuro Surgery,
Government Medical College, Thrissur is made
available. It is contended that the attack on the
third respondent by a mob of people cannot be
termed as exercise of the right of private
defence. According to the Counsel, the third
respondent is known to the appellants as he had
worked for them as a manual labourer. Hence, the
offence under the SC/ST (PoA)) is also attracted.
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
4. Learned Public Prosecutor also opposed
the prayer for bail and submitted that, even if
it is taken that the third respondent was
apprehended while preparing to commit theft, that
is no justification for the brutal manner in
which he was manhandled by the appellants.
5. Before going into the merits of the
contentions, mention has to be made about the
frequent incidents of mob attacks, spurred by
hatred, anger and lack of rational thinking.
These incidents not only pose a threat to
individuals and communities, but also undermine
the very fabric of our society. Mob attacks,
whether fuelled by political ideologies, social
divisions, or personal vendetta have far reaching
negative consequences. Even in the case at hand,
where the third respondent is alleged to have
attempted to commit theft, there was no
justification for the appellants to have attacked
him as a group, resulting in the third respondent
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
being in vegetative state for more than two
months. In this context, it is essential to note
the discharge summary of the third respondent,
detailed in the communication dated 06.06.2023
issued by the Department of Neurosurgery,
Government Medical College, Thrissur. The
communication shows that the third respondent was
diagnosed with RIGHT FTP ACUTE SDH with ME + MLS
and had to undergo RIGHT FTP DECOMPRESSIVE
CRANIECTOMY + LAX DUROPLASTY. In ordinary
parlance, this means that the third respondent
had blood clot between the surface of his brain
and dura mater. Therefore, brain surgery was
conducted and a portion of the skull removed. The
third respondent also underwent TRACHEOSTOMY,
which means that an opening was created at the
front of his neck and a tube inserted into the
window pipe to help him breathe. During
hospitalisation, the third respondent developed
right Pneumothorax, which could have resulted in
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
lung collapse, but for the emergency ICD
treatment and pulmonology cross consultation. The
abdominal subcutaneous wound suffered by the
third respondent also developed infection and the
bone flap had to be removed under local
anesthesia.
6. The argument advanced on behalf of the
appellants is that they had exercised their right
of private defence. This argument is countered
by the counsel for the third respondent by
contending that the exception would not apply,
since the attack was premeditated and done with
the intention of causing more harm than is
necessary for the purpose of such defence.
Presently this Court is called upon to decide
whether bail can be granted to the appellants.
Hence, it is not necessary to delve deep into the
contention with respect to the right of private
defence. As it is informed that the police was
able to record the third respondent's statement
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
due to his medical condition, it is not advisable
to grant bail to the appellants now, as it may
have an adverse impact on the investigation. As
such, I find no reason to interfere with the well
considered order of the Special Court.
In the result, the criminal appeals are
dismissed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
Scl/
Crl.Appeal Nos.659, 666, 672 & 707 of 2023
APPENDIX OF CRL.A 666/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.
M.P. NO. 54/2023 DATED 26.04.2023
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT
FOR SC/ST PA ACT CASES, THRISSUR
