Arshad P.K. v. State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: A. Badharudeen
Judgment Date: 2023-08-03
Court Decision / Holding: Appeal allowed. Impugned order set aside. Appellant enlarged on anticipatory bail on specified conditions.
Final Disposition: Anticipatory bail granted to the appellant on conditions as stated; impugned order set aside.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Arshad P.K.

Respondents

State of Kerala
The Station House Officer, Chelakkara Police Station, Thrissur District
Mr. Santhosh

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• C. M. Mohammed Iqubal

Counsels for Respondents

• M. P. Prasanth (Public Prosecutor)

Case Synopsis & Summary

Arshad P.K., the 8th accused, appeals the order denying anticipatory bail under Section 14A of the SC/ST (POA) Act in Crime No. 215/2023 of Chelakkara Police Station, Thrissur. The prosecution alleges offences under IPC Sections 323, 324, 341 and 308, read with 34, and under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, arising from an incident around 2:45 am on 15.04.2023 where the accused allegedly assaulted the defacto complainant, a person from the Scheduled Caste, with an intention to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The defense contends that the defacto complainant visited Abbas P.A., the appellant’s uncle, to steal arecanut bags, and that what occurred was resistance to theft rather than a caste-motivated attack; there was no deliberate knowledge of the complainant’s caste by the accused at the time of the incident. The Public Prosecutor conceded that two crimes were registered contemporaneously and submitted that there were no specific overt acts alleged against the appellant. The High Court, after considering the case diary and FIR, found that the incident involved resistance to theft and that knowledge of caste could not be inferred, indicating that the SC/ST POA offence requires fuller investigation. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the impugned order and granting anticipatory bail on conditions: surrender within ten days, bond and sureties of Rs. 30,000, cooperation with investigation, no witness intimidation, and no commission of offences during bail validity.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 14A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) ActSections 323, 324, 341 and 308 IPCSection 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) ActSection 15A(3) of the SC/ST (POA) Act

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Common intention
Anticipatory bail

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellant contends there was no intent to inflict serious injuries, the incident arose from resistance to theft, caste was not known to the accused at the time, and there is no basis under the SC/ST (POA) Act for pre-arrest detention; bail should be granted on anticipatory basis with appropriate conditions.

Contentions of Respondents

The prosecution contends that two crimes were registered and there could be overt acts; the possibility of caste-based motive under the SC/ST (POA) Act requires thorough investigation; however, the facts also necessitate careful consideration of bail in light of ongoing investigation.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
CRL.A No. 659/2023	CRL.A No.659/2023	Mentioned Only	Annexure A2 references this judgment; presented for background, not discussed or applied in the decision.
CRL.M.C. No. 3602/2023	CRL.M.C. NO.3602/2023	Mentioned Only	Annexure A3 is an order; referenced as part of the appendix, without treatment in the operative reasoning.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN** **THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1945** ## **CRL.A NO. 1090 OF 2023** **AGAINST THE ORDER ORDER DATED 15.07.2023 IN C.M.P.NO.208/2023 OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT CASES, THRISSUR IN CRIME NO.215/2023 OF CHELEKKARA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT** ## **APPELLANT/PETITIONER/8TH ACCUSED:** **ARSHAD P.K. AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. KHALID, PLAKKAL PEEDIKAYIL, KILLIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680591 BY ADV C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE, COMPLAINANT & INJURED:** |**1**|**STATE OF KERALA**| |---|---| ||**REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,**| ||**HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031**| |**2**|**THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,**| ||**CHELAKKARA POLICE STATION, CHELAKKARA P.O.,**| ||**THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680586**| |**3**|**MR. SANTHOSH,**| ||**AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. CHANDRAN, NAMBAZHIPADI HOUSE,**| ||**VETTIKKATTIL, NEDUMPURA VILLAGE, CHERUTHURUTHI,**| ||**THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 679531**| ||**BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR**| ||**PP - M P PRASANTH**| **THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 2 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 3[rd] day of August, 2023** This appeal has been filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter referred to as “the SC/ST (POA) Act, for convenience”) at the instance of the 8[th] accused in Crime No.215/2023 of Chelakkara Police Station, Thrissur where the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341 and 308 read with 34 of IPC as well as under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor. Though notice was served upon the defacto complainant as mandated under Section 15 A(3) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, he did not appear. Perused the case diary placed by the learned Public Prosecutor and the FIR in Crime No.214/2023 registered by Chelekkara Police Station in regard to an occurrence on 15.04.2023 at the time of occurrence of the present crime. Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 3 3. The prosecution case is that, at about 2.45 am on 15.04.2023, the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted the defacto complainant with intention to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The further allegation is that the defacto complainant is a person belonged to Scheduled Caste community where the accused are not members of either Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community. 4. While pressing for anticipatory bail to the appellant/8[th] accused, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the defacto complainant in the present crime, one Mr. Santhosh reached the house of one Abbas P.A., who is the 1[st] accused in this crime and also the uncle of the appellant and attempted to steal arecanut bags kept at the house during the odd hours on 15.04.2023, for which Crime No.214/2023 was registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 511 and 379 of IPC. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, this crime is the outcome of resistance while the defacto complainant attempted to steal the arecanut bags and there was no Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 4 intention for the appellant or other accused to cause any serious injuries and also they don't have any knowledge regarding the caste of the defacto complainant at the time of occurrence, so as to attract offence under the SC/ST (POA) Act. 5. It is also submitted that no serious overt acts alleged against the appellant and the resistance offered when the defacto complainant attempted to steal the property of of the above said Abbas P.A was misread and accordingly this false case is foisted. Accordingly, learned counsel for the appellant pressed for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant after setting aside the order impugned. The learned counsel also offered co-operation in the matter of investigation. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor also conceded registration of two crimes at the same time of occurrence and also submitted that there is no specific overt acts alleged against the appellant. 7. In this case, the case diary would suggest that the defacto complainant sustained injury and it is discernible Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 5 from the FIR in Crime No.214/2023 of Chelekkara Police Station that he attempted to steal of arecanut bags belonged to Mr. Abbas P.A. who is the uncle of the appellant herein and the resistance thereof led to the alleged overt acts. Therefore, it has to be noted that the knowledge of caste of the defacto complainant, who is a stranger to the accused at the time of commission of the alleged crime, could not be inferred from the circumstances. Therefore, the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act is a matter which would require effective investigation by the Investigating Officer. 8. Since the facts of the case is as narrated, I am of the view that resistance offered while attempting to steal the property of the 1[st] accused can be a good defence for the accused and in such case grant of anticipatory bail can be resorted to, since prima facie, case in this occurrence is doubtful. In the result, the appeal stands allowed and the order impugned stands set aside. The appellant is enlarged on anticipatory bail on the following conditions: Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 6 i. The appellant shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the appellant and record his statement, if necessary. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the appellant before the Jurisdictional Court on the date of arrest itself. ii. On such production, Jurisdictional Court shall release the appllant on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand), by himself and by two sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court. iii. The appellant shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so. iv. The appellant, shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner. Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 7 v. The appellant shall not commit any offence during currency of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted. **Sd/-** SK **A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE** Crl.A No. 1090 of 2023 8 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.A 1090/2023** **PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES : ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 214/2023 OF CHELAKKARA POLICE STATION DATED 15.04.2023 ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.A.NO.659/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 27.06.2023 ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C.NO.3602/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 22.06.2023** ## **RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES : NIL**