Kerala High Court
Hydrose vs State Of Kerala on 3 September, 2024
Author: K.Babu
Bench: K. Babu
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..1..
2024:KER:66767
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 12TH BHADRA, 1946
CRL.A NO. 1528 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1163/2024 OF Aluva Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2024 IN CRMC
NO.2096 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,
ERNAKULAM
APPELLANTS:
HYDROSE
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O M I MUHAMMED, MEENATHARAKKAL HOUSE,
KUNNATHERY, THAIKATTUKARA P O, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683106
BY ADVS.
T.A.AJMAL HUSSAIN
K.P.PRASANTH
ARUNRAJ S.
JINSON JACOB
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..2..
2024:KER:66767
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 SANTHOSH
AGED 47 YEARS
ATTUPURAMBOKKIL, MUTHIRAKKAD, MUTHIRAKKAD SC
SAMUCHAYA FLAT, KEEZHMAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
683112
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.09.2024, ALONG WITH CRL.A.1384/2024, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..3..
2024:KER:66767
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 12TH BHADRA, 1946
CRL.A NO. 1384 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1163/2024 OF Aluva Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2024 IN CRMC
NO.2088 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,
ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/S:
SHIJO ANTONY
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O ANTONY, MUTTOMTHOTTUKUDY HOUSE, PATTERIPURAM
KARA, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE , ERNAKULAM, PIN -
683101
BY ADVS.
ANIL K.MUHAMED
T.E.ISMAIL
KRISHNAKUMAR G.
AJIN SALAM
MUHAMMED AFRIN NUHMAN T.T.
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..4..
2024:KER:66767
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 SANTHOSH
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O GOPALAN, AATTUPURAMBOKKIL, MUTHIRAKKAD,
MUTHIRAKKAD SC SAMUCHAYA FLAT, KEEZHMAD,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683105
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.09.2024, ALONG WITH CRL.A.1528/2024, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..5..
2024:KER:66767
K.BABU, J.
-------------------------------------
Crl. Appeal Nos.1384 & 1528 of 2024
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2024
JUDGMENT
These appeals are filed under Section 14-A of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989, ('the Act' for short). The
challenge in this appeal is to the common order dated
19.07.2024 in Crl.M.C Nos.2088/2024 and 2096/2024
passed by the Court of the Special Judge for the trial of
the offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ernakulam.
2. The appellants are accused Nos. 1and 2 in
Crime No.1163/2024 of Aluva East Police Station.
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..6..
2024:KER:66767
Appellant in Crl.A.No.1528 of 2024 is accused No.1.
Accused No.2 is the appellant in Crl.A.No.1384 of 2024.
They are alleged to have committed the offences
punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(2) and 3(5)
of the BNS and Section 3(2)(va) of the Act.
3. The prosecution case: The victim/respondent
No.2 to belongs to a SC Community. The appellants are
not members of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
The victim/respondent No.2 is an auto-rickshaw driver by
profession. On 05.07.2024 at 1.30 a.m, some passengers
hired the victim's auto-rickshaw. Accused No.1
attempted to secure the passengers. He obstructed the
victim from plying the auto rickshaw. Accused No.1 drove
his auto-rickshaw close to the victim. The victim
prevented him. Accused No.1 voluntarily caused hurt to
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..7..
2024:KER:66767
him by hitting against his left eye. During the course of
the incident, the side curtain of the auto-rickshaw driven
by accused No.1 was damaged. Accused No.1 informed
the incident to accused No.2, the owner of the vehicle.
Later, at 02.00 a.m., accused No.2 came to the scene. The
victim was sleeping in his auto-rickshaw. Accused No.1
again assaulted the victim. Accused No.2 voluntarily
caused grevious hurt to him by means of an iron rod. He
also kicked the victim.
4. The victim appeared in person. He submitted
that if the appellants/accused are granted anticipatory
bail, it would affect his safety and security. He further
stated that even after the incident, on the strength of the
interim order passed by this Court, the
appellants/accused threatened him.
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..8..
2024:KER:66767
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail
application on the ground that the bail plea is hit by
Section 18 of the Act.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants/accused
submits that the materials placed before the Court are
not sufficient to attract the offences under the Act. The
learned counsel for accused No.1 submitted that there is
no allegation that accused No.1 used any weapon.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that
accused No.2 has criminal antecedents. The learned
Public Prosecutor further submitted that the custodial
interrogation of the appellants/accused is required.
8. I have gone through the Case Diary. The
prosecution alleges that the accused assaulted the victim
for the reason that he belongs to a Scheduled Caste
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..9..
2024:KER:66767
Community. On a persual of the materials placed before
the Court, I hold that the prosecution could prima facie
establish the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act.
Therefore, the bail plea of the appellants/accused in
respect of Section 3(2)(va) of the Act is barred under
Section 18 of the Act.
9. The prosecution also alleges offence under
Section 118(1) of the BNS. The weapon allegedly used is
an iron rod. The prosecution specifically alleges that the
criminal acts were done in furtherance of their common
intention. The weapon used has not been recovered.
10. Having considered the materials placed before
the Court, I am of the view that the appellants/accused
are not entitled to anticipatory bail. Therefore, their bail
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..10..
2024:KER:66767
plea stands rejected. The common order impugned
stands confirmed.
11. It is legally permissible for this Court to direct
the accused to surrender before the Jurisdictional Court
while rejecting a prayer for anticipatory bail {See: Nathu
Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (MANU/SC/0360/2021)
: [2021 (3) KLT Online 1113 (SC)] and Rahul v. State of
Kerala [ILR 2021 (4) Kerala 64)]}.
12. The appellants are directed to surrender before
the jurisdictional Court on or before 10.09.2024. On their
surrender before the jurisdictional Court, if the appellants
prefer application seeking regular bail, the Court shall
dispose of the application on the same day itself. The
appellants are at liberty to serve copy of the application
seeking bail in advance to the Public Prosecutor. On
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..11..
2024:KER:66767
receipt of the advance copy of the bail application, the
Public Prosecutor shall see that notice is served on the
victim/ de facto complainant before the bail application is
heard.
The Crl.Appeals are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
K.BABU,
JUDGE
kkj
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..12..
2024:KER:66767
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure1 THE RELEVANT TREATMENT RECORD OF
APPELLANT
Annexure2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF COMMON ORDER DATED
19/07/2024 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 2088 OF
2024 AND CRL.M.C. NO. 2096 OF 2024
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1384 &
1528 of 2024
..13..
2024:KER:66767
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
19.07.2024 OF HON’BLE SPECIAL
COURT FOR TRAIL OF OFFENCES UNDER SC/
ST ACT (POA) ACT, ERNAKULAM IS HEREBY
PRODUCED MARKED AS ANNEXURE A1
Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR AND FIS IN CRIME
NO.1163/2024 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION
DATED 05.07.2024 IS HEREBY PRODUCED
MARKED AS ANNEXURE A2
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT
CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL
COLLEGE AT ERNAKULAM IS HEREBY
PRODUCED MARKED AS ANNEXURE A3
