Kerala High Court
Shaji vs State Of Kerala on 27 August, 2025
2025:KER:65727
CRL.A NO. 1608 OF 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 1608 OF 2025
CRIME NO.718/2025 OF Tanur Police Station, Malappuram
1. AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.07.2025 IN Crl.M.P NO.811 OF 2025
OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST(POA) ACT & NDPS ACT CASES, MANJERI
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3:
1 SHAJI, AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. ANDY, KURUDANPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KUMARAN PADI NIRAMARUTHUR,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 676109
2 GEETHA, AGED 47 YEARS
W/O. SHAJI, KURUDANPARAMBIL HOUSE
KUMARAN PADI NIRAMARUTHUR,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676109
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR
SMT.SWARNA THOMAS
RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER TANUR POLICE STATION,
TANUR, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 676302
2025:KER:65727
CRL.A NO. 1608 OF 2025 2
3 SOUMYA, AGED 35 YEARS
D/O. GOPALAN, MUNDEKKATTILPADI HOUSE, VATTAKULAM P.O,
PONNANI, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 679578
SMT. SEENA.C (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:65727
CRL.A NO. 1608 OF 2025 3
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 28.07.2025 in Crl.M.P.
No.811 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for SC/ST (POA)
Act & NDPS Act Cases, Manjeri, rejecting an application for
anticipatory bail filed by the appellants/accused in Crime
No.718 of 2025 of Tanur Police Station, which was registered
alleging commission of offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
296(b), and 85 of the BNS and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
2. The allegations leading to the registration of Crime
No.718 of 2025 of Tanur Police Station is that, the appellants
[accused Nos.2 and 3 in the crime] are the parents of the 1 st
accused. It is alleged that the 1 st accused in the case had
married the de facto complainant, who is a member of one of
the scheduled caste communities, on 21.02.2022. It is alleged
that, while the de facto complainant and the 1st accused were
living together as husband and wife, the 1 st accused fell in love
2025:KER:65727
with another woman and started an affair with her. It is alleged
that, when the de facto complainant objected to to the illicit
relationship of the 1st accused with another woman, the 1st
accused started physically and mentally harassing the de facto
complainant and in furtherance of the common intention of the
1st accused with the appellants herein (accused Nos.2 and 3),
the appellants prevented the de facto complainant from
entering into the house of the 1 st accused on 11.06.2025 and
wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant, voluntarily
caused hurt and abused her by referring to her caste name and
thus they committed the offences alleged against them.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would
submit that the appellants are absolutely innocent in the matter.
It is alleged that the appellants have been roped in as the
accused in the case only as a matter of pressure tactics. It is
submitted that, the appellants are living separately from
accused No.1 and the de facto complainant and they never had
any occasion to live along with the 1 st accused and the de facto
complainant in the house of the 1 st accused. It is submitted that,
at any rate, considering the nature of the allegations, the
appellants can be granted anticipatory bail. It is submitted that,
2025:KER:65727
the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act will not apply as,
prima facie, the complaint arises out of matrimonial disputes
between the de facto complainant and the 1st accused .
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application
for anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the crime was
registered only on 02.07.2025 and the investigation is only
progressing. It is submitted that, since there is a bar against
grant of bail under the provisions of the SC/ST Act, this Court
cannot grant anticipatory bail unless this Court were to come to
the conclusion that that prima facie the offences under the
SC/ST Act have not been committed by the accused. It is
submitted that, in the facts of this case, there is nothing to
indicate that the offences under the SC/ST Act have not been
committed and therefore, the appellants are not entitled to
anticipatory bail.
5. The de facto complainant appears in person. She
objects to the grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants. It is
submitted that, the appellants had physically attacked the de
facto complainant and had abused her by referring to her caste
name. It is submitted that, owing to the torture meted out to
her by the appellants and the 1 st accused, she had to abandon
2025:KER:65727
her matrimonial home and was forced to live along with her
aged parents. It is submitted that, there is threat to her life and
there is every chance that the appellants and the 1 st accused
will interfere with the investigation, if they are granted
anticipatory bail.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would
submit that Crime No.718 of 2025 of Tanur Police Station was
registered as a counter blast to the Annexure- III and Annexure-
IV complaints filed by the appellants on 18.06.2025 and
19.06.2025 before the Parappanangadi Police Station and the
Police Complaints Authority, Malappuram, respectively.
7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellants, the learned Public Prosecutor and the de facto
complainant, I am of the view that since the disputes between
the appellants and the de facto complainant appear to stem
from the matrimonial disputes between the 1st accused (son of
the appellants) and the de facto complainant, prima facie, the
offences under the SC/ST Act are not attracted and therefore,
the bar to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 18 of the
SC/ST Act will not prevent this Court from granting
anticipatory bail the appellants. The appellants have no
2025:KER:65727
criminal antecedents and considering the nature of the
allegations, their custodial interrogation do not appear to be
necessary for the purposes of completing the investigation. In
such circumstances, I see no grounds to deny anticipatory bail
to the appellants.
Therefore, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order
dated 28.07.2025 in Crl.M.P. No.811 of 2025 will stand set
aside. It is directed that the appellants shall be released on bail
in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.718 of 2025
of Tanur Police Station subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The appellants shall execute separate bonds
for sums of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only)
each with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the
satisfaction of the investigating officer;
(ii) The appellants shall appear before the
investigating officer as and when called upon to do so;
(iii) The appellants 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.718 of 2025 of
2025:KER:65727
Tanur police station;
(iv) The appellants shall not involve in any
other crime while on bail;
(v) The appellants shall not enter the local
limits of Changaramkulam Police Station (where the de
facto complainant is stated to be residing) until further
orders.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the
investigating officer in Crime No.718 of 2025 of Tanur 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
appellants for anticipatory bail and shall not be treated as a
finding by this Court on any issue.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt
2025:KER:65727
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure I TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.718 OF 2025
DATED 02.07.2025 OF TANUR POLICE STATION
Annexure -II TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.718 OF 2025
DATED 02.07.2025 OF TANUR POLICE STATION
Annexure III TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST
APPELLANT BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PARAPPANAGADI POLICE STATION DATED 18.06.2025
Annexure IV TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST
APPELLANT BEFORE THE POLICE COMPLAINTS
AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM DATED 19.06.2025
Annexure5 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.07.2025
IN CRL.M.P NO. 811/2025 ON THE FILES OF THE
SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST(POA) ACT & NDPS ACT
CASES, MANJERI IN CRIME NO. 718/2025 OF TANUR
POLICE STATION
