Abdul Hakkeem vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 11257 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
                                     &
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN
          Friday, the 27th day of October 2023 / 5th Karthika, 1945
                CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2023 IN CRL.A NO.1573 OF 2023
 SC 592/2022 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT & NDPS ACT CASES, MANJERI
PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

     ABDUL HAKKEEM, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. ABDUPPA, THETHRAMPALLI HOUSE,
     CHATHALLUR WEST,
     PERAKAMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676541

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

  1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
     KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031.
  2. BABU, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. CHANDAN, KALIYANGAL HOUSE, CHEKKUNNU,
     PERAKAMANNA, CHATHALLUR WEST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676541.


     Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein the
High Court be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed on the appellant in
S.C.No.592/2022 dated 11.10.2023 of the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act
and NDPS Act Cases, Manjeri arising out Crime No.109/2022 of the Edavanna
Police Station, Malappuram District, and release him on bail, in the
interest of justice.


     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of SHRI K.RAKESH, Advocates for the
petitioner and of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondent, the court
passed the following:




                                                                    P.T.O.
             P.B.SURESH KUMAR & JOHNSON JOHN, JJ.
                -----------------------------------------------
                Criminal Appeal No.1573 of 2023
                -----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 27th day of October, 2023.


                                ORDER

Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2023

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also the

learned Public Prosecutor.

2. This is an application filed by the appellant under

Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) seeking

orders suspending the sentence imposed on him consequent on his

conviction in terms of the judgment in S.C No.592 of 2022 on the

files of the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act & NDPS Act Cases,

Manjeri, which is impugned in the appeal.

3. The appellant stands convicted for the offences

punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326 and 506(i) of the

Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced, among others, to undergo

imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 326

IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).

The accusation against the appellant is that on 14.03.2022, at about

4.45 pm, infuriated by the repeated requests made by PW1 for

matchbox, the appellant beat PW1 with a piece of wood on his head,

shoulder and back bone and thereby caused fracture to his

backbone. It is on a finding that the prosecution has proved the said

accusation that the Special Court convicted the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 326 IPC and sentenced him to

undergo imprisonment for life applying Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST

Act.

4. It is seen that it is on a finding that PW1 suffered

an injury to his vertebra that the appellant was convicted for the

offence punishable under Section 326 IPC. The injuries noted by the

doctor who examined PW1 at the Government Medical College

Hospital, Manjeri immediately after the occurrence as revealed from

Ext.P8 wound certificate are only (1) Pain over left clavicle, (2)

Tenderness over left clavicle and chest, (3) Diffused abdominal

tenderness, (4) Lacerated wound on centre of forehead 2cm x 0.5

cm and (5) Lacerated wound above left eyebrow 4cm x 0.5 cm.

Ext.P8 wound certificate creates a doubt as to whether the injury

stated to have been suffered by PW1 to his vertebra is one suffered

in the alleged occurrence. We are, therefore, inclined to suspend the

execution of the sentence imposed on the petitioner.

In the result, the application is allowed. The execution

of the sentence imposed on the petitioner is suspended on condition

that he shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent

sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional

court.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

Sd/-

JOHNSON JOHN, JUDGE.

YKB

27-10-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar