Kerala High Court Suspends Sentence Of Man Accused Of Involvement In "Cutting Hand" Of Professor For Allegedly Insulting Prophet Mohammad

The matter arose in 2010 when a question in an exam set by Professor Joseph, the former Head of the Malayalam Department of Newman College, Thodupuzha, contained a passage that was alleged to have insulted Prophet Mohammed. Subsequently, on July 4, 2010, a group of armed men attacked Prof. Joseph and his family as they were going to church, and chopped off his right hand for setting the question paper.

The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice P. V. Balakrishnan observed that the accused had undergone incarceration for more than 9 years now. The Court found that the accused surrendered on November 6, 2015, but the trial did not begin until June 23, 2021, and the judgment was delivered only in July 12, 2023.

While suspending the sentence and granting bail to the accused, the Court observed thus:

“The applicant has been undergoing incarceration, at the pre-conviction and post-conviction phases, for over 9 years. Furthermore, the fact that the accused facing the same allegations were earlier imposed a lesser term of imprisonment and have been released after having undergone the sentence is a factor that cannot be ignored. Additionally, the appeals filed by the NIA against the findings of the learned Sessions Judge are being considered in separate appeals, which have not yet been taken up. There is also the likelihood of delay, as the prime accused has surrendered, and the learned Sessions Judge may have to take up the trial and dispose of it in accordance with the law and some of the original records may be required for that purpose. In view of these facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the sentence imposed on the applicant can be suspended pending the consideration of the appeal.”

The 3^rd accused was charged for commission of offences punishable under Explosive Substances Act, UAPA and under various provisions of the IPC.

A total of 31 accused persons faced the Trial, and the Trial Court convicted 13 accused persons and acquitted the remaining 18 accused persons in 2015.

The Sessions Court convicted and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment under Section 20 of the UAPA. The appellant was also convicted under Section 302 read with Section 120B of the IPC and Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act, and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each.

The Prosecution submitted that Nasar was a main conspirator for hatching the conspiracy of chopping the hand. It was alleged that Nasar was also accused of recruiting persons for terrorism and had monitored and supervised the entire operation.

Senior Advocate Ragenth Basant, who appeared for Nasar, submitted that he had surrendered on November 06, 2015 and had been in custody ever since. It was further argued that he has been incarcerated for over nine years. The Counsel urged for the suspension of his sentence, highlighting the lengthy duration of his incarceration and the absence of any near prospects for his appeal to be heard. Relying on Apex Court judgments, it was argued that long incarceration constitutes a travesty of justice and violates Article 21, particularly if there is no reasonable likelihood of the appeal being heard on time.

On the other hand, the Assistant Solicitor General Of India submitted that the trial was delayed because the accused was absconding. It was stated that the accused was a religious fanatic who chopped the hands of the Professor for invoking terror in people's minds.

The Court found that the first accused who was absconding had surrendered, and his trial is taking place now. The Court thus noted that the appeal of the accused would not be considered shortly since the trial of the first accused had begun. It further observed that persons who were convicted for similar offences were only sentenced to 5 years imprisonment, whereas the accused was convicted to life imprisonment.

The Court further stated, “As the appeal is of the year 2013, and as appeals preferred by accused undergoing sentence are pending, it may not be possible to take up the appeal and hear the matter in the near future. Furthermore, the appeals seeking enhancement of sentence in the earlier case are also pending.”

Relying upon Apex Court judgments, the Court observed that the long delay in considering the appeal is a favourable factor for releasing the accused on bail.

As such, the Court suspended the sentence and enlarged the appellant on bail.

The appeal has been moved by Advocates E.A.Haris, M.A.Ahammad Saheer, Muhammed Yasil, P.C.Noushad, Wakarul Islam K.S., E.A.Haris, Renjith B.Marar, P.C.Noushad

Case Number: CRL.A NO.1204 OF 2023

Case Title: M K Nasar v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 794

Click here to Read/Download Order