Kerala HC Refuses To Grant Anticipatory Bail To Three Forest Officials Who Were Accused Of Torturing A Tribal Person
The Kerala High Court has rejected the pre-arrest bail plea of three forest officials who were accused of lodging a false case and torturing a tribal man.
A Single Bench of Justice V.G. Arun said, “… the articles recovered from the second respondent were not included in the property list filed in the Magistrate Court. As such, there are prima facie materials to attract the offence under Section 3(p) against appellants 1 to 4, since they were directly involved in the seizure, arrest and registration of crime.”
The Bench, however, observed that since the fourth official belong to a Scheduled Caste (SC) community, he cannot be prosecuted for the offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act.
Advocates V.V. Nandagopal Nambiar, Preeja P. Vijayan, and Chitra Johnson appeared for the appellants while Public Prosecutor, and Advocates Arundas K.S. and Abhishek Kurian appeared for the respondents.
Facts -
The appellants were accused of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 294(b), 506, 330, 201 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(p), 3(1)(e), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). The appellants, in their capacity as forest officials, had inspected the autorickshaw of a tribal man in Kizhukkanam Section of Idukki Wildlife Sanctuary, and on inspection, the said man was found to be carrying wild animal meat in his autorickshaw as a result of which a case was registered and a report was submitted to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court.
Based on the remand report, the tribal man was remanded to judicial custody and then his custody was given to the Forest Officer for one day but was later granted bail. Being a member of the Scheduled Tribe, the tribal leaders and political parties started agitations, alleging that the said man was falsely implicated and tortured by the forest officials. Much after his release, a crime was registered against the appellants and five others and the appellants moved an application for anticipatory bail before the Special Court which was dismissed on finding that the investigating agency was proceeding with the investigation of a crime having a prima facie case for offences punishable under the SC/ST (PoA) Act.
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel noted, “The allegation that the second respondent was assaulted after arrest is difficult to believe in the light of Annexure A4 medical certificate issued within few hours of his arrest. Therein, no mention is made regarding any external injuries on his body. Further, when the second respondent was produced before the Magistrate, he made no complaint about any physical torture or abuse. In the medical examination conducted thereafter also, no injury was noted. Having found the complaint regarding physical assault to be without substance, the allegation that the second respondent was abused by caste name, cannot be accepted as such.”
The Court further noted that the other accused were roped in for carrying out their formal duties, pursuant to registration of the crime and that the materials now available do not make out the offence under Section 3(p) against them.
“There are no materials for attracting the offence under Section 3(1)(e) also. As far as the offence under Section 3(va) is concerned, it is pertinent to note that, except Section 330, the other IPC offences are bailable. Even though Section 330 is incorporated, in the absence of proof regarding hurt or assault, that offence will not be attracted. Indisputably, appellants 4, 5 and 8 belong to the Scheduled Caste community and cannot therefore be prosecuted for offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act”, held the Court.
The Court, therefore, directed the remaining five officials to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks and not attempt to influence or intimidate the tribal man and other witnesses.
Accordingly, the Court denied anticipatory bail to the first three appellants.
Cause Title- V. Anilkumar & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2023/KER/36007)
