High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeCrl.M.Cs disposed of with modifications: deposi...

CRL.MC Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022

Case / Petition Number:CRL.MC Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • K. Haripal
Judgment Date
2022-03-03
Court Decision / Holding
Crl.M.Cs disposed of as above. Condition 2 (deposit of Rs.7,000) retained; Condition 1 (bond of Rs.50,000 with Kerala-based sureties) retained in spirit for appearance but the requirement that sureties must belong to Kerala is deleted; the petitions are disposed accordingly.
Final Disposition
Crl.M.Cs disposed of with modifications: deposit condition retained; Kerala-based surety requirement deleted; overall disposition to balance state interests with migrants’ circumstances.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • SANJEEV HANSDA
  • MANISH CHODA
  • NARESH SOREN
  • AKASH HUMBRUM
  • CLOUDIES MARANDI
  • JAG MOHAN
  • BRAMA PURTHI
  • BARANA BAS MARANDI
  • BADKA MORMU
  • JITRAM MURMU
  • AKASH CHAKKI
  • PAPPURAJ KISKU
  • SULEMAN MARANDI
  • SANJAY HANSDAK
  • BABLU HANSDAK

Respondents

  • State of Kerala rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • SARATH K.P.
  • • S. RAJEEV
  • • V. VINAY
  • • M.S. ANEER

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri. HRITHWIK C.S

Case Synopsis & Summary

The Kerala High Court, in four connected criminal miscellaneous petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C., addresses bail conditions imposed in Crime No. 1588/2021 of Kunnathunadu police station arising from a large-scale incident on 26.12.2021, during which 174 accused allegedly formed an unlawful assembly, confined police officers, assaulted them, and caused destruction to a police jeep and other property, resulting in substantial losses. The petitioners (accused) challenge two conditions imposed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate: (i) a bond for Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties from Kerala, and (ii) a deposit of Rs.7,000 per accused. They argue that migrant workers should not be required to produce Kerala-sureties and that the deposit is punitive and unnecessary. The State contends the bail conditions are necessary to ensure appearance at proceedings and to safeguard State property, especially given the PDPP Act involvement. After hearing, the court holds that the deposit condition (ii) should not be deleted, citing Hemachandra M.T. @ Kamalesh and others v. Sub Inspector of Police and others, and related authorities to justify liability for damages to the State. However, drawing on Motiram and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Valson v. State of Kerala, it upholds the principle that the Kerala-based surety requirement (condition (i) for local sureties) can be deleted. The petitions are disposed of with these modifications, balancing state interests with migrants’ circumstances.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 482 of Cr.P.C.Sections 143, 147, 148, 332, 323, 324, 342, 427, 436, 440 read with Section 149 of the IPCSection 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that the two bail conditions—bond of Rs.50,000 with two Kerala-based sureties and deposit of Rs.7,000—are harsh and discriminatory for migrant workers. They seek deletion of the Kerala-surety requirement and a reduction or removal of the deposit, arguing that migrant status and the scale of charges do not warrant strict local bonds.

Contentions of Respondents

The State argues that the conditions are necessary to secure the accused’s presence at proceedings and to safeguard State property given the offence’s gravity and the PDPP Act involvement. The deposit is urged as a measure of accountability for the damages caused to public property.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Hemachandra M.T @ Kamalesh and others v. Sub Inspector of Police and another2011 (4) KLT 841PositiveCited to justify retaining the liability to contribute to state damages (supporting the deposit condition).
Motiram and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh1978 KHC 178PositiveCited to support deleting the Kerala-based surety requirement, i.e., local sureties need not be from Kerala.
Valson v. State of Kerala1984 KHC 246PositiveCited to support not insisting that sureties be from the State of Kerala.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against CRL.MC Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 1197 OF 2022** **CRIME NO.1588/2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM** **PETITIONERS:** 1 SANJEEV HANSDA AGED 25 YEARS SON OF MANOHAR HANSDA, BARTOL VILLAGE, DUMDUMA P O, TINSUKIA DIST, DUMASA PS, JHARKHAND- 825109. 2 MANISH CHODA AGED 20 YEARS SON OF BADHU CHODU GOSAICHOK VILLAGE VNAGAIYA P O SAHIB GANJ DIST, MIRZA CHOUKI JHARKHAND, PIN - 834001 3 NARESH SOREN AGED 18 YEARS SON OF THALKU SORAN, GOSAICHOK VILLAGE, BHAGAIYA P O, SAHIBGANJ DIST, MIRZA CHOKI, JHARKHAND, PIN - 834001 4 AKASH HUMBRUM AGED 22 YEARS SON OF JETHU HUMBRUM LEELA, THARIK GRAM, MIRZA CHOUKI, JHARKHAND, PIN - 834001 5 CLOUDIES MARANDI AGED 23 YEARS SON OF EARNEST, ASANJULA P.O, Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 2 ||HIRANPOR PS,| |---|---| ||PAKKOOR DISTRICT| ||JHARKHAND, PIN - 816104| |6|JAG MOHAN| ||AGED 26 YEARS| ||SON OF BUBHU MURMU,| ||BAHADHAIR P.O.| ||KUMARGUNJU P.S.,| ||SOUH DHINJAJ PUR DISTRICT| ||WEST BENGAL, PIN - 733102| |7|BRAMA PURTHI,| ||SON OF HARISANKAR,| ||PURTHI, PARSABAL VILLAGE,| ||WEST SINGAM DIST.,| ||KARIAKOLA PS,| ||JHARKHAND, PIN - 834001| |8|BARANA BAS MARANDI| ||SON OF CHARLESMARANDI,| ||BUSHA VILLAGE,| ||SAHIBGUNJU DIST.,| ||MIRSACHOUKKI| ||JHARKHAND, PIN - 816101| |9|BADKA MORMU,| ||AGED 33 YEARS| ||SON OF PARGANA MORMA,| ||PAKAPAL VILLAGE,| ||BHAGALPUR DIST.,| ||BIHAR, PIN - 812001| |10|JITRAM MURMU| ||AGED 25 YEARS| ||SON OF HEPNO MURMU,| ||BARGAMA VILLAGE, GODDA DIST.,| ||JHARKHAND, PIN - 814147| |11|AKASH CHAKKI| ||AGED 27 YEARS| ||SON OF RADO CHAKKI,| ||KONKOWA VILLAGE,| ||PASCHIM SIMBUM DIST,| ||JHARKHAND, PIN - 833201| |12|PAPPURAJ KISKU| ||SON OF MICHEAL KISKU,| Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 3 BASAHA VILLAGE, SAHIB GANJ DIST., JHARKHAND, PIN - 814102 13 SULEMAN MARANDI AGED 20 YEARS SON OF CHANDAR MORANDI, PATRHRA BADATOLLA VILLAGE, SAHIB GANJA DIST., MIZA CHOKI, JHARKHAND, PIN - 816101 14 SANJAY HANSDAK, AGED 22 YEARS SON OF SRJUN HANSDAK, KOHBARA VILLAGE, SAHIB GANJ DIST., MIZA CHOKI, JHARKHAND, PIN - 816101 15 BABLU HANSDAK SON OF SAHIBRAM HANSDAK, ILAKE VILLAGE, SAHIB GANJ DIST., MIZA CHOKI, JHARKHAND, PIN - 816101 BY ADVS. SARATH K.P. S.RAJEEV V.VINAY M.S.ANEER ## **RESPONDENT:** STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 SR.PP - SRI. HRITHWIK C.S. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.03.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.1235/2022, 1244/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 4 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL** **THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 1235 OF 2022** ## **CRIME NO.1588/2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER:** 1 MAGENDRA SESS AGED 19 YEARS SON OF RABIXE SESS, BARIHAGARPOSH VILLAGE, GARPOSH PS, SAMBALPOOR DIST, ODISHA, PIN - 768224 2 HANIL MUNDA AGED 27 YEARS S/O SANIKA MUNDA, PATARAPALLI VILLAGE, BANAEI P.O, SUNDARAGARH DIST, BENAEI PS, ODISHA, PIN - 761119 3 CHAKADALA NAYAK AGED 19 YEARS S/O GAYANAYAK, BELIAPATA VILLAGE, BALIPATA .P.O, BHANJANAGAR PS ODISHA, PIN - 761126 4 AJAYA NAG AGED 27 YEARS S/O RUSHANAG, KUSURLA VILLAGE, JORADOHORA P.O, KALAHANDI. DIST, MARAMPUR P.S., ODISHA, PIN - 766102 BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV SARATH K.P. M.S.ANEER V.VINAY Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 5 ## **RESPONDENT:** STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031 SR.PP.SRI. HRITHWIK C.S THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.03.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.1197/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 6 # **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 1244 OF 2022** **CRIME NO.1588/2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** ANKIT ORAON AGED 25 YEARS SON OF GANDRU ORAON, KAMATI VILLAGE, CHANHO PS, RANCHI DISTRICT, JHARKHAND, PIN - 835214 BY ADVS. SARATH K.P. S.RAJEEV V.VINAY M.S.ANEER **RESPONDENT:** STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031 SR.PP.SRI.HRITHWIK C.S THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.03.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.1197/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 7 # **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 1245 OF 2022** **CRIME NO.1588/2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.65,71,78,154,159 & 173:** 1 JITAN BORAIK AGED 25 YEARS SON OF SUKLUSWAR, NAMPATHAR VILLAGE, GAMEMUVA P.O, KAMRUP DIST, BOKO PS, ASSAM, PIN - 781123 2 REMMOIA DARLONG AGED 31 YEARS S/O LAL BIKSANGA DARLONG, DEORACHHARA VILLAGE, DEORACHHARA P.O, UNAKOTI DIST, KAILASHAHAR PS, TRIPURA, PIN - 799277 3 SANJAY NAIK AGED 33 YEARS S/O GADABHAR NAIK, JEKA GRAM, BUGUDA PS, GANJAM DISTRICT, ODISHA, PIN - 761118 4 AKASH SOREN AGED 19 YEARS S/O KHEPA SOREN, KHERING PS LIMIT, KHERING DIST, ASSAM, PIN - 781123 5 BISHNU BRAHMA AGED 20 YEARS S/O PARGANA MORMA, PAKAPAL VILLAGE, BHAGALPUR DIST., BIHAR, PIN - 812001 6 BENJAMIN MARDI AGED 25 YEARS Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 8 S/O LOKUS MARDI, BENEBARI VILLAGE, MURSHIDABAD, WEST BENGAL, PIN - 484881 BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV SARATH K.P. M.S.ANEER V.VINAY ## **RESPONDENT:** STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031 SR.P.P. SR. HRITHWIK C.S THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.03.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.1197/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 9 ## **ORDER** These are petitions filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C by accused in Crime No.1588/2021 of Kunnathunadu police station, registered on 26.12.2021 alleging offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 332, 323, 324, 342, 427, 436, 440 read with Section 149 of the IPC and Section 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.1197/2022 are accused Nos.66, 69, 70, 77, 80, 82, 108, 110, 155, 158, 161, 164, 167, 168 and 174 in the crime. Petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.1235/2022 are accused Nos. 49, 53, 54 and 55 whereas the 51[st] accused in the crime is the petitioner in Crl.M.C No.1244/2022 and accused Nos. 65, 71, 78, 154, 159 and 173 are the petitioners in Crl.M.C No.1245/2022. 2. The allegations against the accused persons, 174 in number, is that on 26.12.2021 at 02.30 a.m, they had formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, wrongfully confined the defacto complainant, a police officer and members of the police team and armed with deadly weapons, Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 10 assaulted and caused them injuries. They also set ablaze the police jeep bearing registration No.KL-01 CH 7141 and other gadgets of the police and caused them a total loss of Rs.12,05000/-. All of them were arrested for the case on 29.12.2021 and 03.01.2022 and since then are in judicial custody. 3. By the order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kolenchery they were released on bail imposing stringent conditions, inter alia, on the following conditions: - “ i. The petitioners shall execute bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum and the two sureties must belong to the State of Kerala. - ii. The petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.7,000/- each before this court. The petitioners shall be released on bail only on deposit. ” 4. The petitioners are aggrieved by the above two conditions. According to the learned counsel, petitioners are migrant workers, it is illegal to insist that they should bring sureties from State of Kerala. Similarly, it is also unwholesome to impose a condition that they should deposit an amount of Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 11 Rs.7,000/- each. 5. Learned Senior Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. According to him, the petitioners are migrant labourers, such conditions have been imposed to secure their presence during further proceedings. 6. After hearing counsel on both sides, I do not find any reason to delete condition No.2 since, the specific allegation against the accused persons is that they had caused damage to the State by destroying the vehicle and other gadgets carried by the police and caused a loss of Rs.12,05000/-. Offence under Section 4 of the PDPP Act also is alleged against them. Therefore, as held by this Court in **Hemachandra M.T @ Kamalesh and others v. Sub Inspector of Police and another [2011 (4) KLT 841]** etc, they are liable to bear a portion of the damage sustained by the State. Therefore, condition No.2 cannot be deleted. 7. At the same time, having regard to the various authorities relied on by the learned counsel, **Motiram and others** **v. State of Madhya Pradesh [1978 KHC 178]** , **Valson v. State** Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 12 **of Kerala [1984 KHC 246]** etc., it is unwholesome to insist them to produce sureties from the State itself. Therefore, the condition that sureties must belong to State of Kerala stand deleted. Crl.M.Cs are disposed of as above. Sd/- **K.HARIPAL JUDGE** Jms/03.03 //True Copy// P.A to Judge Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 13 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1197/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1588 OF 2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION Annexure2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE, KOLENCHERY IN CMP NO 139 OF 2022 DATED 14.02.2022 Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 14 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1235/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1588 OF 2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION Annexure2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE, KOLENCHERY IN CMP NO 143 OF 2022 DATED 14.02.2022 Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 15 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1244/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1588 OF 2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION Annexure2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE, KOLENCHERY IN CMP NO 140 OF 2022 DATED 14.02.2022 Crl.M.C.Nos.1197, 1235, 1244 and 1245 of 2022. 16 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1245/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 A CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1588 OF 2021 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION Annexure2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE, KOLENCHERY IN CMP NO 138 OF 2022 DATED 14.02.2022