Madhu Lynching Case| Kerala High Court Upholds Special Court Order Cancelling Bail To 11 Accused

Madhu Lynching Case| Kerala High Court Upholds Special Court Order Cancelling Bail To 11 Accused

Case: Marakkar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr and connected cases

Coram: Justice Kauser Edappagath

Case No.: CRL.A NO. 874 OF 2022

Court Observation: “All appeals dismissed except that of Accused number 11,”

“It is not the law that if a serious violation of the bail conditions which sabotages the trial is noticed, the trial court is powerless, and it must refer the parties to the superior court which granted the bail for remedy. If any non-compliance with the bail conditions imposed by the superior court results in the trial being frustrated, it is for the trial court to take measures to correct it. The Court of Session cannot be a mute spectator of the flagrant violation of the conditions of bail imposed by the High Court subverting the judicial process”

“An application for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C is generally examined on the anvil of the existence of supervening circumstances or violation of the conditions of bail. If in a case, the relevant factors which should have been taken into consideration while dealing with the application for bail have not been taken note of or it is founded on irrelevant considerations, then also the superior court can cancel the bail invoking Section 439(2)”.

“the power vested in the Court of Session and the High Court to cancel the bail under Section 439 (2) of Cr.P.C is concurrent. There is nothing in Section 439(2) to suggest that the Court of Session has no power to commit a person released on bail by the High Court to custody”.

“the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court specified or constituted under Section 14 of the SC/ST(PoA) Act is empowered to cancel the bail granted by the High Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under Section 14A on proof of violation of bail conditions invoking Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C”.

“When an accused to whom bail has been granted either tries to interfere with the course of justice or attempts to tamper with evidence or witnesses or threatens witnesses or indulges in similar activities which would frustrate the fair trial, bail granted can certainly be cancelled”

“…for the simple reason that the calls were incoming calls, it cannot be said that there is no violation of condition No.’c’. What is prohibited is contact between the accused with the witnesses. Even witnesses contacting the accused would also amount to violation of condition No.’c'”.

Previous Posts

Delhi High Court Restores Bail In View Of Disputed Fact About Accused Threatening Complainant

Kerala High Court Upholds Life Sentence Of Beedi Tycoon Mohammed Nisham For Mowing Down Security Guard Chandrabose

PwD Act | Alternate Employment With Same Pay Benefits To Employee Who Suffers Disability During Course Of Employment A Statutory Right: Andhra HC

Presumption U/S 113-B Evidence Act Not Attracted If Incident Of Cruelty Has Become So Stale To Not Disturb Mental Equilibrium Of Woman: MP High Court

Temporary Official Appointed On Daily Rated Or Work Charge Basis To Do Specific Job Cannot Claim Seniority For Such Service Period: Delhi High Court

Keywords

Madhu Lynching Case,