Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1944 CRL.A NO. 36 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 596/2021 OF SPECIAL COURT-TRIAL OF OFFENCE UNDER SC/ST(POA)ACT 1989, MANNARKKAD IN CRIME NO.995/2021 OF KUZHALMANNAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. APPELLANT/PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: BABU AGED 37 YEARS S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, PALLANCHATHANNUR (PO), MATHUR, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 541. BY ADV P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD) RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALATHUR WHO IS REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. 2 RADHAKRISHNAN AGED 48 YEARS S/O.LATE VELLA, NARIKKOTTUKALAM HOUSE, PALLANCHATHANUR (POST), MATHUR, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 541. BY ADVS. RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY K.V.ANTONY K.VIJINA OTHER PRESENT: PP SRI.ARAVIND V MATHEW THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 29th day of March, 2022. This appeal is filed against an order passed by the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act, Mannarkkad in Crime No.995/2021 of Kuzhalmannam Police Station, Palakkad District, dismissing an application seeking pre-arrest bail.
2. According to the learned counsel, there is no whisper in
the FIS that the defacto complainant belongs to SC/ST and that the offences alleged were committed by the appellant knowingly of his caste name. Going by the materials on record, it is revealed to this Court that the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner are those punishable under Sections 341, 323, 326 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. It is provided that when any offences under the Indian Penal Code and scheduled under the SC/ST (POA) Act if committed by a person belonging to higher caste against a person, who is a member of SC/ST community, knowingly of the caste of the victim of the offensive act, the offence under Section 3(2) (va) of the Act would be attracted. According to the learned counsel, no where in the FIS it is stated that knowingly of the factum that the victim is a member of SC/ST Community, the scheduled offences were committed by the appellant.
3. This Court has noticed from the address of the appellant
and the respondent that both were residents of Alathur and has previous acquaintance, being engaged in a money transaction. As alleged by the prosecution, the incident alleged was occurred when the money advanced was demanded. Therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant has committed the offensive act against the
respondent unknowingly of his caste. The court below has dismissed the application seeking pre-arrest bail on account of the bar contained in the Act against invocation of the power under Section 438 Cr.P.C to grant pre-arrest bail. For the reasons stated above, this Court is declined to interfere with the order assailed in the appeal on hand.
The learned counsel submits that the appellant intends to
surrender before the investigating officer. Accordingly, Crl.Appeal is disposed of directing the appellant to surrender before the Investigating Officer on 31.03.2022. The Investigating Officer shall interrogate him on the day itself and further interrogation if found unwarranted, shall produce him before the jurisdictional court so as to enable him to prefer application seeking regular bail. The court in such an event is also directed to pass appropriate orders in the bail application without delay.
Sd/- MARY JOSEPH JUDGE al/-+