Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V, Justice K.V. Jayakumar, Kerala High Court
Trial Can’t Be Concluded In Near Future: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To 4 PFI Members Accused Of Killing RSS Leader SK Srinivasan
|The Kerala High Court said that given the magnitude of the case of the prosecution and the stay on proceedings, which specifically interdicts the framing of charges, there is no foreseeable possibility of the trial commencing or concluding in the near future.
The Kerala High Court has granted bail to four members of banned organisation Popular Front of India (PFI) who were accused of killing prominent RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) leader S. K. Srinivasan of Palakkad.
The Court was hearing Criminal Appeals filed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (NIA Act), challenging the Orders of the Special Court.
A Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and K.V. Jayakumar observed, “The Apex Court, by order dated 06.05.2024 has interdicted the special Court from framing the charge, and the said stay is still in force. In view of the large number of witnesses, exhibits and material objects, there cannot be any doubt that the trial cannot be concluded in the near future even if the stay is vacated.”
The Bench said that given the magnitude of the case of the prosecution and the stay on proceedings, which specifically interdicts the framing of charges, there is no foreseeable possibility of the trial commencing or concluding in the near future.
Advocate E.A. Haris represented the Appellants while Senior Panel Counsel Sasthamangalam S. Ajithkumar represented the Respondents.
Factual Background
The Appellants-four accused persons were the members of the PFI, who were accused of committing offences punishable under Sections 120B, 34, 109, 115, 118, 119, 143, 144, 147, 148, 449, 153A, 341, 302, 201, 212 read with 149, 120B read with 302 of IPC, Section 3(a),(b),(d) read with Section 7 of the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988 and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18A, 18B, 20, 22C, 23, 38, and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Section 25 (1) (a) of the Arms Act, 1959. The Central Government had received credible and actionable intelligence indicating that the office bearers, members, and cadres of the PFI and its affiliated organisations in Kerala had conspired to instigate communal violence and radicalise their cadres to commit terrorist acts in the State of Kerala and other parts of the country. It was revealed that the PFI had allegedly created an organised network with the objective of recruiting vulnerable Muslim youth into proscribed international terrorist organisations to facilitate the commission of terrorist acts.
Allegedly, in 2022, the accused persons conducted reconnaissance of residences belonging to several leaders from Hindu community who appear in their target-list and chose and decided to eliminate one prominent Hindu leader named S. K. Srinivasan of Palakkad. It was further alleged that they in furtherance to the conspiracy, set out to commit terrorist act for which 5 persons came on three two-wheelers, three of whom criminally trespassed into SKS Autos situated at Melamuri, Pallippuram, Palakkad run by S. K. Sreenivasan, and inflicted grievous injuries on Sreenivasan and killed him by hacking his head and other parts of his body with choppers which the assailants were carrying with the sole intention and purpose to murder him brutally, so as to create terror in the mind of other communities and public at large.
Reasoning
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, noted, “Accused No.60, as evident from the materials on record, has undergone a pre-trial detention for two years and three months. The trial proceedings were stayed pursuant to an order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court. The final report submitted by the NIA is voluminous, comprising 1688 documents, 1114 witnesses, 696 material objects, and ten terabytes of FSL reports.”
The Court added that even if proceedings were to resume, the sheer number of witnesses and extensive volume of documentary and material evidence clearly indicate that the trial would remain pending for several years.
“It is pertinent to note that out of the total 66 accused, 49 were already enlarged on bail by this Court or by the Apex Court. Only 12 persons are now in custody. The accused with almost similar charges were already released on bail. … In Shaheen Welfare Association (supra), the Apex Court held that a pragmatic and constitutionally sensitive approach has to be taken where an undertrial is deprived of personal liberty for an extended period and there is no reasonable prospect of the trial concluding within a reasonable time”, it further said.
The Court also clarified that in the event of any breach of the conditions or of any other condition that may be imposed by the Special Court in addition, it shall be open to the prosecution to move for cancellation of the bail granted to the Appellants before the Special Court, notwithstanding the fact that the bail was granted by the Court.
“Upon such an application being made, the Special Court shall consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Appeals, set aside the impugned Orders, and granted bail to the accused persons on executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 1 lakh with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Court.
Cause Title- Muhammed Bilal & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:61965)
Appearance:
Appellants: Advocates E.A. Haris and P. Vishnu.
Respondents: Senior Panel Counsel Sasthamangalam S. Ajithkumar and Advocate Sreenath Sasidharan.