Kerala High Court refuses to grant anticipatory bail to Marunadan Malayali Editor booked under SC/ST Act for news against MLA

The Kerala High Court on Friday refused to grant anticipatory bail to Shajan Scaria, the editor and publisher of the YouTube Channel Marunadan Malayali, in a case registered against him for allegedly broadcasting a derogatory news item against Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA), PV Sreenijin. [Shajan Scaria v State of Kerala & Anr.].Justice VG Arun noted that the news item in question contained insults that were intended to humiliate the MLA in public view. "Going by the wording of Section 3(1)(r) (of the SC/ST Act), reference to the caste name of the victim is not necessary for attracting the offence," the Court further observed..As such, the Court found that there was a prima facie case made out against Scaria under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).."It is pertinent to note that the allegations leveled against the second respondent include murder and contain insinuation against the second respondent's father-in-law, aspersions on unnamed judicial officers, and bestows the title 'Mafia Don' on the second respondent (MLA Sreenijin)," the High Court noted..Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal filed by Scaria against an order of a Special Court dealing with offences punishable under the SC/ST Act. The Special Court had dismissed his application for anticipatory bail on June 16..The prosecution's case was that Scaria, in his capacity as the editor and publisher of Marunadan Malayali, had telecast a news item containing false, baseless, and defamatory allegations against MLA Sreenijin.It was alleged that the news item was broadcast with the intent to insult MLA Sreenijin, who belongs to a scheduled caste community..In its order, the Special Court had noted that Scaria had knowledge that MLA Sreejin belonged to a scheduled caste. Hence, the publication of the said news item was sufficient to attract the offence under the SC/ST Act, the Special Court held. Therefore, it declined to grant him anticipatory bail..In his appeal before the High Court, Scaria questioned whether the SC/ST Act was intended to "grant immunity" to politicians from any criticism or allegations of corruption or impropriety by the media or a common man, "simply because he happens to be a member of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe?”.Scaria admitted that he had telecast a video against MLA Sreenijin. However, he submitted that he had no intention to insult the MLA. Scaria further submitted that he published only the facts which he received through his research and sources.He also pointed out that after the first information report (FIR) was registered against him, he removed the controversial video from public view..Therefore, Scaria urged the High Court to set aside the order of the Special Court..The High Court has now ruled that it is not possible to hold that there were no prima facie material to indicate that Scaria had no intention to insult the MLA who belongs to Scheduled Caste within public view..Therefore, the High Court dismissed Scaria's appeal..The appellant is represented by advocates Thomas J Anakkalunkal, Jayaraman S, Litty Peter, Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth, and Melba Mary Santosh..[Read Judgement]