Johnson Abraham vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 31, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1360811

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1360811
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.G.Arun
Decided On: May 31, 2023
Case Number: CRL.A/722/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Johnson Abraham

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

...../ iii additional mact appellant/petitioner/accused: johnson abraham, aged 57 years, s/o abraham, plathottam, kallukunnu, kattaikonam p.o., thiruvananthapuram, pin - 695584 by adv latheesh sebastian respondent/respondents/state&defacto complainant: 1 state of kerala, represented by public prosecutor,high court of kerala, pin - 682031 2 station house officer, pothencode police station, thiruvananthapuram district, pin - 695033 3 shibu, aged 46 years s/o gopalan, kallukunnu, ayirooppara, thiruvananthapuram, pin - 695584 other present: sr.pp.renjith george this criminal appeal having come up for admission on 31.05.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following: -2-judgmentdated this the 31st day of may, 2023 the appellant is the accused in crime no. station alleging commission of offences under sections 323, 324 and 506 of ipc r/w 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of sc/st (prevention of atrocities) act 1989 ('the act' for short). the crime is registered on the basis of a private complaintfiled by the 3rd respondent before the magistrate court and forwarded to the police under section 156(3) cr.p.c. in his complaint, the 3rdrespondent has alleged that, at about of 03:00 pmon 28.12.2022, while he came out of his house to enquire about certain construction activities being carried out on the road leading to hishouse, the appellant abused him by calling his caste name and intimidated him by brandishing a garden spade. the appellant's application for -3- anticipatory bail was rejected by the sessions court, in view of the prohibition contained under section 18 a of the act.2. learned counsel for the appellant contended that the allegation is patently false, which would be evident from the fact that withrespect to an incident that had allegedly occurred on 28.10.2022, the fir was registered only on.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2023 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1945 CRL.A NO. 722 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT in CRMC 840/2023 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT APPELLANT/PETITIONER/ACCUSED: JOHNSON ABRAHAM, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O ABRAHAM, PLATHOTTAM, KALLUKUNNU, KATTAIKONAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695584 BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS/STATE&DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POTHENCODE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695033 3 SHIBU, AGED 46 YEARS S/O GOPALAN, KALLUKUNNU, AYIROOPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695584 OTHER PRESENT: SR.PP.RENJITH GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2-

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 31st day of May, 2023 The appellant is the accused in Crime No. Station alleging commission of offences under Sections 323, 324 and 506 of IPC r/w 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 ('the Act' for short). The crime is registered on the basis of a private complaint

filed by the 3rd          respondent before the Magistrate
Court and forwarded                 to the Police under Section
156(3)       Cr.P.C.          In     his      complaint,         the    3rd

respondent has alleged that, at about of 03:00 PM

on 28.12.2022, while he came out of his house                           to
enquire       about      certain         construction         activities
being     carried       out    on     the     road     leading     to   his

house, the appellant abused him by calling his caste name and intimidated him by brandishing a garden spade. The appellant's application for -3- anticipatory bail was rejected by the Sessions Court, in view of the prohibition contained under Section 18 A of the Act.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the allegation is patently false, which would be evident from the fact that with

respect to an incident that had allegedly occurred on 28.10.2022, the FIR was registered only on 01.03.2023. In the meanwhile Annexure 2 Crime was registered against the third respondent and others for various offences, including the

offence        under          Section        307      of        IPC,on    the
allegation         of        having      brutally          assaulted      the
appellant.             It is contended that the Magistrate,
before      whom       the     complaint       was    filed,       was    not
competent       to      forward         the    same        to    the   police
under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C as offences                                 under

the SC/ST(PoA) Act were also included.

3. The 3rd respondent has not appeared, despite service of notice through the -4- investigating officer.

4. The case dairy made available by the Public Prosecutor shows that the crime was registered based on a complaint filed before the Magistrate Court on 31.01.2023.It is specifically

stated       in        the    complaint           that        the     incident
occurred at 03:00PM on 28/10/2022.                                A perusal of
the    wound       certificate         produced            along     with   the
complaint          shows       that         he        was     examined       on

28.12.2022, with respect to an incident that had occurred on 28.10.2022. Surprisingly, even after two months of the incident, the doctor has noted aberrations on the appellant's elbow and contusion over his cheek. The certificate by itself raises a doubt about the veracity of the allegations. The fact that the 3rd respondent had filed the complaint only after Annexure 2 crime

was     registered           against        him       on     03.01.2023      is
another       relevant         factor.           On    consideration         of
these factors, it appears that the complaint                                 is

-5- more as a counter blast to the crime registered against the third respondent. Being so, I find the appellant to be entitled for per-arrest bail, in spite of the prohibition contained under Section 18A of the Act. In the result, the criminal appeal is allowed and the investigating officer in Crime No.369/2023 of Pothencode Police Station is directed to release the appellant on bail in the event of his arrest, on the appellant executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand

only)     with     two      solvent      sureties    for    the    like
amount.      The       appellant   shall        report   before     the
investigating           officer    on     the    first     Monday   of

every month for three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE Scl/ -6-

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Johnson Abraham vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.G.Arun