Thomas vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 9584 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                        PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 17TH BHADRA, 1945
                  CRL.A NO. 1316 OF 2023
         AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.MC 2216/2023 OF
    SPECIAL/SESSIONS JUDGE FOR SCHEDULED CASTES AND
        SCHEDULED TRIBES (POA)ACT,1989, ERNAKULAM


APPELLANT/PETITIONER/ACCUSED

         THOMAS
         AGED 61 YEARS
         S/O VAREETH, THOPPIL HOUSE,
         LAKSHAMVEEDU COLONY, EDAKUNNUKARA,
         KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683576

         BY ADV ARUN BOSE


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
         HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
         ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682018

    2    THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
         ANKAMALY POLICE STATION, ANKAMALY (PO),
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683572

    3    LAKSHMI
         AGED 56 YEARS
         W/O CHANDRAN, PERATTU HOUSE,
         LAKSHAMVEEDU COLONY, EDAKUNNUKARA,
         KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683576

         BY SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Crl. A. No.1316/2023
                                        :2:




                            N. NAGARESH, J.

           `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                   Criminal Appeal No.1316 of 2023

           `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
              Dated this the 8th day of September, 2023


                             JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

The appellant, who is the sole accused in Crime

No.534/2023 of Angamaly Police Station, seeks to pass an

order granting anticipatory bail to him.

2. The appellant states that he is the sole accused in

Crime No.534/2023 and the alleged offences are under

Sections 447 and 448 IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989. The 3rd respondent-de facto

complainant alleged that on 30.06.2023, the appellant

trespassed into a room adjacent to the kitchen and on

hearing hue and cry of the de facto complainant and her

daughter, the wife of the appellant and others came to the Crl. A. No.1316/2023

scene. The complainant alleged that the appellant humiliated

the complainant by calling caste name and also assaulted

her sexually and abused her verbally using lascivious

comments against her. The appellant also intimidated the de

facto complainant, it was alleged. The appellant states that

he is innocent and has not committed any offence. Even the

de facto complainant has no case that the appellant insulted

her in public.

3. The petitioner therefore moved the Court of

Session / Special Judge for Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 filing

Crl.M.C. No.2216/2023 seeking anticipatory bail. The

Sessions Judge, without properly appreciating the

circumstances of the case, dismissed the bail application

holding that there is a specific bar under Section 18 of the

Act, 1989 against grant of anticipatory bail.

4. The appellant challenges the order dated

16.08.2023 in Crl.M.C. No.2216/2023. The counsel for the

appellant argued that the order of the Sessions Court is Crl. A. No.1316/2023

illegal and unsustainable. The appellant is willing to

cooperate with the investigation proceedings and to abide by

any conditions imposed by this Court for grant of anticipatory

bail.

5. Relying on the judgment in Basheer K.M. And

others v. Rajani K.T. and others [2022 (5) KLT 352], the

counsel for the appellant submitted that this Court can

entertain the appeal against the order dated 16.08.2023 and

grant anticipatory bail to the appellant.

6. The counsel for the appellant also relied on the

judgment in Arul P. Sugathan and others v. State of

Kerala and another [2021 (2) KLT 34] wherein this Court

has held that there is no absolute bar against grant of

anticipatory bail, though the jurisdiction is to be exercised

sparingly and only in very exceptional cases by High Court.

7. The Public Prosecutor entered appearance and

resisted the Criminal Appeal. On behalf of the 1 st respondent,

the Public Prosecutor stated that the allegations made by the

de facto complainant against the appellant constituted grave Crl. A. No.1316/2023

offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989. Section 18 of the Act, 1989 creates an embargo on

the powers of any Court in the matter of grant of anticipatory

bail as contemplated in Section 438 Cr.P.C. The appeal is

therefore only to be dismissed, urged the Public Prosecutor.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant

and the learned Public Prosecutor representing respondents

1 and 2.

9. It is alleged that the appellant with the knowledge

that the de facto complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste,

humiliated the complainant on 30.06.2023 by calling caste

name and also assaulted the complainant sexually and

abused her verbally using lascivious comments. The

complaint discloses offences punishable under the IPC and

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989.

10. Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Crl. A. No.1316/2023

provides that nothing in Section 438 Cr.P.C. shall apply in

relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an

accusation of having committed an offence under the Act,

1989.

In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the appellant. However, taking into

consideration the facts of the case, the Criminal Appeal is

disposed of directing that the appellant may surrender before

the investigating officer within two weeks from today and in

that case, the investigating officer can interrogate the

appellant, effect recovery if any, and conduct the

investigation and produce the appellant without delay before

the court below concerned, where the appellant can move for

bail. In such case, the learned Magistrate shall pass

appropriate orders preferably on the same day itself,

provided advance notice on such application has been given

to the Assistant Public Prosecutor.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/12.09.2023 Crl. A. No.1316/2023

APPENDIX OF CRL.A 1316/2023

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.534/2023 OF ANKAMALY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE LITTLE FLOWER HOSPITAL AT ANGAMALY ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE OUTPATIENT TICKET DATED 28.06.2023 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE FAMILY HEALTH CENTRE AT PALLISSERY ANNEXURE A4 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.08.2023 OF THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT/PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT ERNAKULAM IN CRL.M.C. NO. 2216/2023

RESPONDENT ANNXURES : NIL