Ramani and others v. State of Kerala

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 25TH ASWINA, 1945 ``` ``` CRL.A NO. 1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 1412/2023 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES)ACT, MANNARKKAD ``` ## **`APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS`** - **`1 RAMANI AGED 52 YEARS W/O. SIVAN, SANTHI NIWAS, POOKKOTTUKALAM, ANJUMOORTHY MANGALAM P.O.,ALATHUR ,PALAKAD, PIN - 678682`** - **`2 SUJATHA AGED 50 YEARS W/O UNNIKRISHNA , CHERUMADATHIL HOUSE, VADAKKUMMURI, VARANDHARAPPLLY P.O., TRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680303`** - **`3 SUSEELA AGED 54 YEARS W/O.JAYARAMAN, PARAKKAL HOUSE, ELAVAMPADOM P.O.,KANIYAMANGALAM, KIZHAKKENCHERY, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKAD, PIN - 678684`** - **`4 SUMATHY AGED 48 YEARS`** - **`W/O.BALAN ,KOKKALA HOUSE, NAIR THARA, MANAPPADOM P.O., PUTHUKODE, ALATHUR,PALKADU, PIN – 678689`** ## **`BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW`** ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 THANKA AGED 71 YEARS`** - **`W/O AARU, NELLIKODE HOUSE, VANDAZHY P.O, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN – 678706`** - **`SRI. N.R.SANGEETH RAJ-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BY ADV M.VIVEK-R2`** ``` THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 17[th] day of October, 2023 The appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 03.08.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.1412 of 2023 in Crime No.126 of 2023 of Mangalam Dam Police Station, passed by the Court of the Judge, Special Court for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mannarkkad. The order is one rejecting an application for anticipatory bail filed by accused 1 to 4 in the crime. 2. The allegation against the appellants/accused is that on 13.01.2023 at 12.00 p.m., the appellants restrained the defacto complainant and assaulted on her hands due to the vengeance arising out of sale of property by one brother of the accused to the son of the defacto complainant. On the basis of the complaint, a crime was registered against the appellants for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 325 read ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ## **`3`** with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. 3. The appellants, who are elder ladies filed Crl.M.P.No.1412 of 2023 in the Special Court invoking Section 438 of the Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail. The Special Judge was of the opinion that there is a _prima facie_ case against the accused to attract an offence under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and hence application for anticipatory bail was dismissed as per order dated 03.08.2023. It is aggrieved by the said order that the appellants are before this Court. 4. The appellants would submit that the Special Court miserably failed to understand the traumatic circumstances and psychological impact which will fall upon the accused, who were falsely implicated in criminal cases. The appellants ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 4 ``` are sisters of the plaintiff in O.S.No.68 of 2023 of the Munsiff’s Court, Alathur, who are residing on four different places in the District. The impugned order is unsustainable as the accused were implicated subsequent to the filing of O.S and as a revenge. 5. The appellants further submitted that the IPC offences, under which the appellants are charged, are all bailable offences. This Court in the judgment in **Basheer M and another v. State of Kerala and another** [2020 (2) KLT 790] has held that when an offence punishable under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act is alleged to be committed by a person for the reason that he has committed only bailable offence or offences specified in the Schedule of the Act, in such a case, the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act is also bailable. 6. The appellants further urged that this Court has held in the judgment in **Binesh and others v. State of** ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 5 ``` **Kerala** [2019 (2) KLD 98] that offence under Section 3(1)(s) of the Act would be attracted only if the acts mentioned are committed within public view. The appellants would urge that the acts alleged were not committed in public view. 7. This being a case arising basically out of a civil dispute, the appellants being ladies, if they are taken into custody, they will be put to irreparable loss and injury, contend the appellants. It is also pointed out that no weapons are used in the alleged assault. 8. On 14.09.2023, this Court directed the Public Prosecutor to intimate the filing of the Criminal Appeal to the 2[nd] respondent. On intimation, the 2[nd] respondent appeared through counsel. On behalf of the 2[nd] respondent, it is submitted that the alleged civil dispute is only an excuse and the conduct of the appellants on 13.01.2023 clearly discloses a _mala fide_ intention to insult the 2[nd] respondent, she being ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 6 ``` belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community. It is further pointed out that there are CCTV Camera visuals of the incident, which would show that the 2[nd] respondent was dragged to a public place and showered with abuses and was attacked. Since there is ample evidence to establish the assault on the 2[nd] respondent, no anticipatory bail can be granted. There is a clear prohibition in the Act for grant of anticipatory bail, pointed out the counsel for the 2[nd] respondent. 9. Public Prosecutor entered appearance and resisted the Criminal Appeal. The Public Prosecutor also pointed out that the statements of persons who have witnessed the incident was in tune with the complaint lodged by the appellants. The conduct of the appellants would clearly indicate that they have committed offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 7 ``` Atrocities) Act apart from the IPC offences, for which they are charged. 10. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Public Prosecutor representing the 1[st] respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the 2[nd] respondent. 11. The allegation against the appellants, who are women aged 48 to 54 years, is that on 13.01.2023, the appellants restrained the 2[nd] respondent and assaulted on her hands due to the vengeance arising out of sale of a property by brother of the accused to the son of the defacto complainant. The offences alleged against the appellants are under Sections 341, 323 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 8 ``` 12. It is an admitted position that there is a civil dispute between the son of the 2[nd] respondent and brothers of the appellants. The appellants would contend that there is a civil court order adverse to the son of the 2[nd] respondent. Though there is evidence to show that the 2[nd] respondent was admitted to the Hospital on the very same day itself, the complaint was lodged only after more than 60 days. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the appellants should co-operate with the investigation process. The Criminal Appeal is therefore disposed of directing the appellants to appear before the Investigating Officer on 30.10.2023 at 9.00 a.m. The Investigating Officer shall do the interrogation and produce the appellants before the Special Judge on the same day itself. If the appellants move bail application on the same day with notice to the Public ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 9 ``` Prosecutor and to the defacto complainant, the Special Judge shall strive to pass orders on the bail application on the same day itself. The 2[nd] respondent may also appear before the Jurisdictional Court on 30.10.2023. Sd/- **N.NAGARESH JUDGE** hmh ``` CRL.A NO.1398 OF 2023 ``` ``` 10 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.A 1398/2023`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** ``` ANNEXURE 1TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO. 68/2023 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALATHUR DATED 22.02.2023 ANNEXURE 2TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A NO. 1/2023 (I.A NO. 471/2023) IN O.S NO. 68/2023 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALATHUR DATED 27.02.2023 ``` ``` RESPONDENT ANNEXURES : NIL ```