Kerala High Court
Mohanan Pillai vs State Of Kerala on 1 August, 2025
2025:KER:57274
CRL.A NO. 1274 OF 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 1274 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1117/2025 OF Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2025 IN CRL.MP NO.3742 OF 2025
OF SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED:
MOHANAN PILLAI, AGED 71 YEARS
S/O VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, MOHANALAYAM, KAVIYOOR,
THIRUVALLA, PIN - 689582
BY ADV SMT.VIDYA G NAIR
RESPONDENT/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 AJITHAMMA, PEZHUMKALAYIL VEETTIL, KAVIYOOR ,
KAVIYOOR P.O, PATHNAMTHITTA, PIN - 689582
SMT. SHEEBA THOMAS (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:57274
CRL.A NO. 1274 OF 2025 2
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed under Section 14A of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST
Act'), challenging the order dated 02.06.2025 in Criminal
Miscellaneous Petition No.3742 of 2025 on the file of the
Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta, dismissing an application for
anticipatory bail filed by the appellants/accused in Crime
No.1117 of 2025 of Thiruvalla Police Station, which was
registered alleging commission of offences under Sections
296(b), 115(2), of the BNS and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and
3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
2. Allegation against the appellant is that, on
29.04.2025, at about 01.30 pm, while the de facto complainant
was standing in the front yard of her residential house, the
appellant abused her by hurling obscene words and had caused
hurt to her by repeatedly beating her.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits
that the allegations against the appellant are absolutely
untenable and there is no truth in the allegations. It is
2025:KER:57274
submitted that, though the alleged incident took place on
29.04.2025, the complaint, leading to registration of Crime
No.1117 of 2025 of Thiruvalla Police Station, was given only on
08.05.2025. It is submitted that, even assuming that the
allegations are correct, there is no reason to incorporate any
offence under the provisions of the SC/ST Act. It is submitted
that, since the offence under the SC/ST Act is not attracted, the
bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act will not apply. It is
submitted that, the appellant is a senior citizen [aged 71 years]
and considering the nature of the allegations, custodial
interrogation of the appellant is not necessary. It is submitted
that, the appellant will co-operate with the investigation and
therefore, the appellant may be granted anticipatory bail
subject to conditions.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of
anticipatory bail to the appellant. It is submitted that, going by
the allegations of the de facto complainant, the appellant had
hurled obscene words and made sexually coloured remarks
against her and when the de facto complainant proceeded to
intimate the wife of the appellant about the incident, the
appellant had beaten her using his hands and thus caused hurt
2025:KER:57274
to her. It is pointed out that the de facto complainant was
treated on the same day (29.04.2025) and the injuries noted by
the doctor are conjectural congestion of right eye and
tenderness of right side of face and neck. It is submitted that,
the injuries are consistent with the allegations raised against
the appellant.
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view
that the appellant can be granted anticipatory bail subject to
conditions. The allegation against the appellant is that he had
assaulted the de facto complainant using his hands and had
hurled obscene words against her. There is also an allegation
that the appellant had made certain sexually coloured remarks.
Even assuming that the allegations are true, the fact remains
that the alleged incident took place in the front yard of the
house of the de facto complainant. Whether or not the said
place constitutes a 'public place' or a 'place within public view'
is a matter to be ascertained at the trial of the case. Prima
facie, I am of the view that since the incident took place in the
front yard of the house of the de facto complainant, the
provisions of the SC/ST Act may not be attracted. Therefore,
2025:KER:57274
the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act does not prevent the
grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant.
6. Coming to the offence alleged against the appellant
under the provisions of the BNS, it is seen that the allegation is
that the appellant attacked the de facto complainant using his
hands and certain injuries were allegedly caused to the de facto
complainant on account of the attack by the appellant.
However, no criminal antecedents are reported against the
appellant. Moreover, the appellant is a senior citizen aged 71.
The allegations raised against the appellant do not compel me
to hold that custodial interrogation of the appellant is
necessary.
Therefore, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order
dated 02.06.2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.3742 of
2025 on the file of the Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta will stand
set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on
bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.1117 of
2025 of Thiruvalla Police Station subject to the following
conditions:-
(i) The appellant shall execute bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent
2025:KER:57274
sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the
investigating officer;
(ii) The appellant shall appear before the
investigating officer in Crime No.1117 of 2025 of
Thiruvalla Police Station at 11.00 A.M on 08.08.2025
and thereafter, as and when called upon to do so;
(iii) The appellant shall not attempt to contact
the de facto complainant or interfere with the
investigation or to influence or intimidate the de facto
complainant or any other family members of the de facto
complainant or any witness in Crime No.1117 of 2025 of
Thiruvalla police station;
(iv) The appellant shall not involve in any other
crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the
investigating officer in Crime No.1117 of 2025 of Thiruvalla
Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional
court for cancellation of bail.
I make it clear that the observations in this order are
only for the purposes of considering the entitlement of the
appellant for anticipatory bail and shall not be treated as a
2025:KER:57274
finding by this Court on the merits of the matter.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P. , JUDGE
ajt
2025:KER:57274
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 FAIR COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL MP NO 3742
/2025 PRONOUNCED BY THE HON'BLE SESSIONS
COURT (SPECIAL COURT FOR SCHEDULED CASTES AND
SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES)
ACT 1989 AMENDMENT 2015 PATHANAMTHITTA
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 371/2024
REGISTERD BY THE TRIRUVALLA POLICE STATION
