IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 3953 of 2010()
1. SIVADASAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.JAYARAM
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :07/07/2010
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J
-----------------------
B.A No.3953 OF 2010
--------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of July 2010
ORDER
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 323, 354, 506(i) of
IPC and Section 3(i)(X) &(XI) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
According to prosecution, on 08/02/2010, petitioner was cutting
tree from a disputed property and de facto complainant questioned
the same, when she was beaten up by petitioner. Her modesty was
outraged by dragging her through the road by catching hold of her
jacket. She was criminally intimidated. She was insulted in public
by calling her caste name.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the property
in which the incident happened belonged to petitioner. There was
a long-standing civil dispute between the parties in respect of
possession of the property. A suit was filed for injunction against
petitioner by de facto complainant’s husband, but, it was dismissed.
An appeal was filed and it was also dismissed. Though a crime was
registered including Section 447 of IPC, it was subsequently
deleted.
4. Originally, only bailable offences under Sections 323 and
447 of IPC were included. But, now, offences are altered to
B.A No.3953 OF 2010 2
Sections 354, 506(i) of IPC and Sections 3(i)(x)&(xi) of SC/ST(PA)
Act. The alteration was done pursuant to a petition given by de
facto complainant’s husband to the M.L.A. In the report itself of the
police, it is stated that such a petition was given to M.L.A and
hence the Sections are altered. Petitioner is innocent of the
allegations made. He has not acted in the manner alleged now, it
is submitted.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor conceded that offence under
Section 447 of IPC was subsequently deleted. Offence under
Section 354 of IPC was included subsequently. In FIS, there was no
case for the de facto complainant that she was dragged through
the road by catching hold of her jacket etc. It is also pointed out
that the allegation which constitute offence under Sections 3(i)(x)&
(xi) of SC/ST(PA) Act are also absent in FIS.
5. On hearing both sides, considering the circumstance under
which offence under the SC/ST(PA) Act is introduced and also the
circumstances under which allegations regarding outraging of
modesty are brought in, I am satisfied that petitioner can be
granted anticipatory bail on conditions since petitioner has a
strong and arguable case regarding involvement of offence under
the SC/ST(PA) Act. Hence, the following order is passed.
B.A No.3953 OF 2010 3
(1) Petitioner shall, in the event of arrest be released
on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent
sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of
the arresting officer on the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner shall report before the
Investigating Officer as and when
directed and co-operate with
investigation.
(ii) Petitioner shall not enter the limits of
the police station within which
the crime is registered, except for
compliance of condition no.1.
(iii) Petitioner shall not influence or
intimidate any witness or tamper
with evidence.
(iv) In case, petitioner is involved in
any similar offence, bail is liable to
be cancelled.
(2) This order will be in force only for a period of 15
days from today. In the meantime, petitioner
shall seek regular bail from the court concerned.
Petition is allowed.
K.HEMA
JUDGE
vdv