Rajan, Abhinand and Abishek v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1941** ## **Crl.MC.No.6847 OF 2019(E)** **SC 469/2018 OF PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT,KOZHIKODE** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:** **1 RAJAN AGED 37 YEARS S/O. RAGHAVAN, KATTILE VAYAL HOUSE, KALLAM POST, VIYYUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT** **2 ABHINAND AGED 23 YEARS S/O. SURESH, VELLILLATTU MEETHAL HOUSE, PANTHALAYANI AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT** **3 ABISHEK AGED 19 YEARS S/O. SURESH, VELLILLATTU MEETHAL HOUSE, PANTHALAYANI AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT** **BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU** ## **RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM** - **2 SANTHOSH S/O. RAGHAVAN, J.V.M. HOUSE, CHEMANCHERRY POST, KANHILASSERY, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE - 673 304** ## **SRI.C.K.PRASAD PP** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.02.2020, THE COURT ON 20.02.2020 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 2 ## **R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, J** ************************ Crl.M.C.No.6847 of 2019 ----------------------------------------------------Dated this the 20[th] day of February, 2020 ## **O R D E R** The petitioners are accused 1 to 3 in the case S.C.No.469/2018 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Kozhikode. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 323 and 324 read with 34 I.P.C and also under Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. The prosecution case, as per Annexure-A3 chargesheet filed against the petitioners, is as follows: The de facto complainant is a person who belongs to Scheduled Caste. The accused are persons who do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. On 01.02.2018, at about 17.30 hours, the Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 3 de facto complainant was standing at the side of a public road. The accused then wrongfully restrained him. The first accused took the tray of a 'weighing balance' from a goods autorickshaw which was parked at the side of the road and beat the de facto complainant on the head and the neck with it. When the de facto complainant fell down, the accused stamped him. It is alleged that the accused committed the aforesaid acts with the knowledge that the de facto complainant is a person who belonged to Scheduled Caste. 4. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing the proceedings against the petitioners initiated on the basis of Annexure-A3 chargesheet. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations raised against the petitioners in the chargesheet do not disclose an offence punishable under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the de facto complainant had outraged the modesty of the wife of the Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 4 first accused/first petitioner and a complaint was filed against the de facto complainant in that regard and a case was registered against him and the present case against the petitioners is filed as a counterblast. 7. _Per contra,_ learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the allegations raised against the petitioners in the chargesheet would attract the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act and that the prosecution has produced sufficient materials to prove the allegations raised against the petitioners. 8. Section 3(2)(va) of the Act provides that, whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, commits any offence specified in the Schedule of the Act, against a person or property, knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with such punishment as specified under the Indian Penal Code for such offences and shall also be liable to fine. Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 5 9. The allegations in Annexure-A3 chargesheet definitely constitute the ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C. There is a specific allegation in the chargesheet that the accused beat and hit the de facto complainant and stamped him. There is also a specific allegation that the first accused beat him on the head and neck with the tray of a weighing balance. The prosecution has cited witnesses other than the de facto complainant to prove the incident. There is also medical evidence proposed to be adduced by the prosecution to prove the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant. Therefore, there can be no doubt with regard to the fact that, prima facie, the allegations in the chargesheet attract the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C against the petitioners. 10. The offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C are mentioned in the Schedule of the Act. It follows that, prima facie, the allegations against the petitioners also attract the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act. 11. Of course, in order to attract the offence under Section Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 6 3(2)(va) of the Act, it has to be shown that the accused committed the offence against a person, who is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, or the property belongs to such person, with the knowledge that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. 12. In the instant case, there is a specific allegation in the chargesheet that the accused committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 324 against the de facto complainant with the knowledge that he is a person who belongs to Scheduled Caste. Moreover, it is also stated in the chargesheet that the first petitioner/first accused was earlier a friend of the de facto complainant. The second and the third accused are said to be the nephews of the first accused. In such circumstances, prima facie, it cannot be found that they had no knowledge that the de facto complainant was a person who belongs to a Scheduled Caste. 13. After the amendment of the Act by virtue of Amendment Act 1 of 2016 with effect from 26.01.2016, mere knowledge of the accused that the person, upon whom the Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 7 offence is committed, belongs to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe is sufficient to attract an offence punishable under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act (See **Asharfi v. State of U.P : AIR 2017 SC 5819** ). 14. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be found that Annexure-A3 chargesheet filed against the petitioners do not contain the necessary ingredients to attract the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 324 I.P.C and under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act. The prosecution has also produced materials to prove the allegations raised against the petitioners. Therefore, the prayer for quashing Annexure-A3 chargesheet cannot be allowed. The petition is liable to be dismissed. 15. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that, this order will not affect the right of the petitioners, if any, to file application for discharge before the trial court. The petitioners are also at liberty to raise all their contentions before the trial court. ## (sd/-) ## **R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE** jsr Crl.M.C.No,6847/2019 8 ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT WITH FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT DATED 5.2.2018 IN CRIME NO.86 OF 2018 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRIMINAL M.C. NO. 151 OF 2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE ANNEXURE A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 30.4.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VADAKARA FILED BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE ANNEXURE A4 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO. 86 OF 2018 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A5 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 161 OF CR.P.C. OF PROSECUTION WITNESSES IN S.C NO. 469 OF 2018 OF THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL** TRUE COPY PS TO JUDGE