Kerala High Court
Biju vs State Of Kerala on 28 October, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:80734
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 1918 OF 2025
CRIME NO.579/2025 OF NAGAROOR POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.09.2025 IN CRMP NO.573 OF
2025 OF SPECIAL COURT-TRIAL OF OFFENCE UNDER
SC/ST(POA)ACT1989, NEDUMANGAD
APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 1 TO 5:
1 BIJU
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O.DEVARAJAN,
THARAMKONAM 14/125, MUTTACHAL BHAGAM 1,
VELLALLOOR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695601
2 ANEESH @ SINU
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.PRASANNAN,
ANEESH BHAVAN, NEDUMPARA,
THATTATHUMALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695614
3 ABHINAND @ PONNUS
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O.SABU, VILAYIL VEEDU,
MUTTACHAL VELLALLOOR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695601
4 KIRAN @ UNNIKUTTAN
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O.SANTHILAL,
SUNITHA BHAVAN, VELLAKODU,
VELLALLOOR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695601
5 REJITH @ CHAKKARA
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O.MOHANAN, GEETHA BHAVAN,
2025:KER:80734
Crl.A. No.1918 of 2025
-:2:-
RALOORKAVU, NAGAROOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695601
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SHRI.S.ABHILASH
SMT.ANJANA KANNATH
SMT.SAFNA P.S.
SHRI.GAUTHAM SIJU
RESPONDENTS/STAT & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
NAGAROOR POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT -, PIN - 695601
3 SUNIL KUMAR
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.RAJAN,
CHERUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,
PARAMBIKUNNIL, OONNAMKALLU,
VELLALLOOR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695601
BY ADV. SREEJA V.,
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:80734
Crl.A. No.1918 of 2025
-:3:-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl.A. No.1918 of 2025
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of October, 2025
JUDGMENT
Appellants are the accused in Crime No.579 of 2025 of
Nagaroor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered alleging
offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2),
115(2), 118(1) and 117(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, apart
from Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for
short,'SC/ST Act').
2. According to the prosecution, the accused had, on
06.06.2025, on account of a previous animosity, assaulted the defacto
complainant, who is a member of the Hindu Kuruva community, which
is Scheduled Caste. The accused are alleged to have also made abusive
remarks about the caste of the defacto complainant and thereafter
assaulted him brutally after forming themselves into an unlawful
assembly, inflicting grievous injuries, and thereby committed the
offences alleged.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well
as the learned Public Prosecutor. Though notice to the defacto
complainant was served on 20.10.2025, despite granting an
adjournment on 23.10.2025, there is no appearance on his behalf.
4. The appellants had approached the Special Court in
2025:KER:80734
Crl.M.P. No.573/2025, which was dismissed by order dated
16.099.2025, and hence this appeal is preferred challenging the said
order.
5. The prosecution allegations indicate that the accused had
assaulted the defacto complainant on account of a prior animosity and
knowing fully well that he belongs to the Scheduled Caste community.
However, even going by the prosecution allegations, the incident is
alleged to have occurred on 06.06.2025, while the FIR is registered only
on 05.07.2025, almost a month after the incident. However, the defacto
complainant has tried to explain the delay in lodging the complaint.
6. Though the allegations are serious, the circumstances do
not require any custodial interrogation. The prosecution allegations
prima facie do not indicate that the assault was on account of the caste
of the defacto complainant and hence bar under Section 18 of the
SC/ST Act will not apply. Reference to decision in Prathvi Raj
Chauhan vs. Union of India and Others [2020 (4) SCC 727].
7. Taking into consideration the delay in lodging the complaint
and also the prima facie view of this Court that the incident was not
motivated by the caste of the defacto complainant, I am satisfied that
the appellants can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
8. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed. The of the
Special Court for the Trial of offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act cases,
Nedumangad in Crl.M. P. No.573 of 2025 is hereby set aside and the
appellants are granted anticipatory bail subject to the following
2025:KER:80734
conditions;
(a) Appellants shall appear before the Investigating
Officer on 06.11.2025 and shall subject themselves to
interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer
proposes to arrest the appellants, then, they shall be
released on bail on them executing a bond for
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with
two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the
Investigating Officer.
(c) Appellants shall appear before the Investigating
Officer as and when required and shall also co-
operate with the investigation.
(d) Appellants shall not intimidate or attempt to
influence the witnesses.
(e) Appellants shall not commit any similar offences
while they are on bail.
(f) Appellants shall not leave India without the
permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any
modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional
Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and
pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding
the bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
jka/28.10.25.
2025:KER:80734
APPELLANTS' ANNEXURE
Annexure A1 THE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 579/2025 OF
NAGAROOR POLICE STATION DATED 5.7.2025
