KOCHI: In a major setback for the state police, the Kerala High Court on Thursday granted anticipatory bail to P Krishnadas, chairman of the Nehru College of Educational and Charitable Trust, the first accused in the case related to the suicide of Jishnu Pranoy.
Jishnu was a student of Nehru College of Engineering and Research Centre, Pampady, an institution under the Trust. The court held there was no sufficient evidence to invoke Section-107 and 306(abetment of suicide) of the IPC against Krishnadas.
“The case diary and witnesses’ statements clearly show the prosecution did not gather any evidence to support the abetment charge. Concrete evidence, not vague allegations, are needed to invoke such charges against the accused. There is no evidence to confirm the petitioner was directly or indirectly involved in the alleged torture of Jishnu in the principal’s room,” held the court.
The prosecution stated Krishnadas, the first accused and principal conspirator in the case, wanted to enforce harsh discipline in the college by mentally and physically harassing students.
“The prosecution relies only on the statements of the principal, Jishnu’s uncle Mahesh and two students. While the principal’s statement confirms that Jishnu was mentally harassed by the vice-principal, the statement of Mahesh is solely based on hearsay. The allegation by Shaukathali, a student of another college under the Nehru Group, that he was assaulted by Krishnada cannot be taken into account in this case,” held the court.
“Though the police claimed there were injury marks on Jishnu’s body, no external injury was found in the postmortem. Also, there is nothing to show the petitioner was involved in deleting CCTV footage,” said the court, and asked Krishnadas to surrender his passport and not leave the state without permission. He shall not interfere in the day-to-day activities of the college, and refrain from removing electronic devices from the college that could act as evidence.
The court also cited a Supreme Court order stating mere harassment would not attract Section-306. Citing the Ramesh Kumar vs State of Chhattisgarh case, the court said ‘instigation’ must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequences.