CLEETUS Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.561/2019 of the East Kallada Police Station, for offences punishable under Sections 447 , 294(b) IPC and Sec.3(1)(I)(A) and Sec.3(1)(s) of SC/ST(POA) Amendment Act.

(2.) The allegation of the prosecution is that on the previous day of the Parliamentary election, the accused came to the house of the de-facto complainant and offered him money as bribe for voting in favour of a particular party. When the de-facto complainant declined, fully knowing that he belonged to a scheduled caste, complainant abused him calling his caste name. There is a further allegation that he was criminally intimidated. A complaint was laid pursuant to which a crime was registered. Apprehending arrest the petitioner sought for bail before the court below. This was rejected by the court below relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vilas Pandurang Pawar & Others Vs. State of Maharashtra & Others [AIR 2012 SC 3316] and that in Ajas G. Krishnan Vs. State of Kerala [2017(1) KLT 488]. The appellant, aggrieved by the above, has approached this Court.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the de-facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor. Opposing the application, the learned Public Prosecutor contended that few witnesses including the family members of the de-facto complainant have given evidence supporting the prosecution case.