PRAJEESH P S Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are applications filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure moved by accused Nos.1 to 3, 5 and 6 in crime 16/2021 of Kaipamangalam police station. Petitioners in BA.2019/2021 are accused Nos.5 and 6 whereas accused 1 to 3 have moved BA. 2020/2021. The crime was registered on 3/1/2021 alleging offence under Sections 141, 143, 147, 341, 323, 324, read with 149 of IPC on the strength of the first information statement given by Suvilal, who has been impleaded as additional 2nd respondent in both the applications. In the first information statement, which was given while undergoing treatment in Elite Hospital, Thrissur, he has stated as follow: On the previous day, that is on 2/1/2021 from18.30 hours to 20.30 hours he was assaulted by the accused persons, four of whom have been named along with four identifiable persons. He is a lorry driver by profession. On 2/1/2021 at about 5:30 PM he had taken his dog for stroll to the paddy field on the east of his house. While the dog was getting relieved, the first accused Arun and others told him that it is not the place where dogs have to be taken for relieving. Immediately he returned to his house. Later, at 6:20 PM, Arun and Murukan reached his house in a motorbike and solicited him to accompany them to the paddy field for spending some time there. Even though he was not willing, offering to take him back soon, he was taken in the motorcycle to the paddy field. After dropping him near the south eastern side of the paddy field, he was brutally manhandled by the accused persons. He was stamped by the 2nd accused Sooraj on his chest. All of them assaulted him brutally; blood was oozing from his nose. Later, at 8:30 PM Arun took him to his house and threatened that if it is revealed to anyone he will be assaulted. He belongs to Hindu Vettuva community. This is the basis for registering the crime. During the course of investigation offence under Sections 294(b), 506(ii), 326 and 308 of IPC besides under Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, for short the Act, has been incorporated.

(2.) Petitioners contend that they are totally innocent. The incident was not happened as alleged by the prosecution, that pursuant to the interim order granted by this Court they had surrendered before the Investigating Officer and were granted bail, that all the recoveries have been effected and custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not warranted. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, there is absolutely no basis for incorporating provisions under the Act.

(3.) I heard the learned counsel for the additional 2nd respondent and also the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.