Madhu Lynching Case: Kerala High Court Stays Special Court Order Canceling Bail Of 12 Accused
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday stayed an order of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mannarkkad, cancelling the bail granted to 12 of the 16 accused in the lynching case of tribal youth, Madhu, accused of stealing food in Attappady in February 2018.Justice Kauser Edappagath stayed the lower court's order till 29th August, 2022 (Monday) on an appeal filed by...
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday stayed an order of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mannarkkad, cancelling the bail granted to 12 of the 16 accused in the lynching case of tribal youth, Madhu, accused of stealing food in Attappady in February 2018.
Justice Kauser Edappagath stayed the lower court's order till 29th August, 2022 (Monday) on an appeal filed by two accused, Marakkar and Radhakrishnan.
The counsel for the petitioners-accused, Advocate S. Rajeev, had challenged the jurisdiction of the Special Court to entertain and pass the impugned order on the ground that the bail was granted by the High Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction.
On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent, DGP T.A.Shaji submitted that the trial court had every right to cancel the bail if conditions are violated, even if the bail order was passed by the High Court. He further added that the objection had already been considered by the said Court on the point raised by the petitioner.
It was in this context that the High Court opined that the legal point along with merits of the case need to be heard in detail, and hence, granted interim stay till the next date.
The Special Court had cancelled the bail of 12 accused on a finding that they had indulged in influencing the witnesses in the case, as evidenced from the call details that had been submitted.
The Special Court had relied upon Paragraph 5 of the Bail Order issued by the High Court wherein it had been stipulated that bail could be denied by the Court and the accused could be denied in custody till the trial proceedings were over, in case the court find any possibility that the witnesses were being influenced or threatened or won over, or any of the accused was absconding from legal process.
The Special Court had relied on the same, as well as the operative part of the order in clause (b), and arrived at the conclusion that it was vested with the authority to cancel the bail.
It was further opined that every trial court has the authority to cancel bail in the above circumstances by invoking authority under Section 437 (5) and 439 (2) of CrPC and that the High Court would never unnecessarily harass subordinate officers if the order has been supported by valid reasons.
The petitioner-accused in the instant case were represented by M/S Advocates S.Rajeev, V.Vinay, M.S.Aneer, Sarath K.P., Prerith Philip Joseph, and Anilkumar C.R., while the respondents were represented by the DGP and the Public Prosecutor.
Similar petitions were filed by the other accused persons, and the court ordered that they be released from jail in view of the stay of the impugned order, until the Criminal Appeal was disposed of.
Case Title: Marakkar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr and connected cases