Dental Student Suicide: Kerala High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To College HOD Dr. Kodanda Ram In Abetment Case
The Kerala High Court on Friday (June 19) dismissed the criminal appeal filed by Dr. M. Kodanda Ram seeking pre-arrest bail in the suicide abetment case of dental college student Nithin Raj. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 329]Justice A. Badharudeen opined that there was prima facie commission of offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and...
The Kerala High Court on Friday (June 19) dismissed the criminal appeal filed by Dr. M. Kodanda Ram seeking pre-arrest bail in the suicide abetment case of dental college student Nithin Raj. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 329]
Justice A. Badharudeen opined that there was prima facie commission of offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the statutory bar against grant of anticipatory bail would apply.
The Court observed:
"the appellant/1st accused, being a teacher, used to harass the students generally by using words in filthy and smutty words and made insult and intimidation to Nithin Raj with intention to humiliate him even though without referring his caste name knowing fully well that he is a person who got admission in the college under the SC/ST category. Therefore, this Court is of the view that prima facie, the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST (POA) (Amendment) Act, 2018, is made out, when the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (POA) (Amendment) Act, 2018 would squarely operate."
The Court found that there was nothing to rebut the statutory presumption under the SC/ST Act that the accused Dr. Ram had knowledge that the deceased belonged to the SC/ST community. It was also noted that the accused used to single out the deceased and made derogatory remarks to humiliate him in the presence of his classmates.
"As per Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST (POA) (Amendment) Act, 2018, intentionally insulting or intimidating with intent to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community by a non-member of the said community is an offence and where knowledge regarding the caste identity of the victim is a matter to be inferred from the circumstances as the same is a statutory presumption under Section 8(c) of the SC/ST (POA) (Amendment) Act, 2018, unless the contrary is proved. Here, nothing contra available to rebut the presumption and to throw out the prosecution at this stage of investigation," it reasoned.
Dr. Ram is the HOD of Kannur Dental College and is arrayed as the prime accused in the case. He came before the High Court in appeal after his pre-arrest bail plea was dismissed by Sessions Court, Thalassery. The Sessions Court had granted anticipatory bail to the second accused Dr. Sangeetha Nambiar.
The prosecution allegation is that the deceased student committed suicide due to the constant mental harassment of Dr. Ram. It is further alleged that Dr. Ram humiliated the deceased in front of his classmates, knowing fully well that he was a member of the Scheduled Caste community.
The offences alleged against him are those under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Advocate S. Rajeev appearing for Dr. Ram argued that there was no materials to show that he instigated Nithin to commit suicide. It was further argued that he had been subjected to media trial. It was also pointed out Nithin committed suicide due to the demand for recovery of Rs.15,000/- borrowed at an exorbitant interest by him through an online loan app.
Nithin's father was represented by Advocate A. Parvathi Menon, who was appointed through the Victim Rights Centre of the Kerala State Legal Services Authority (KeLSA). A detailed objection was filed opposing the grant of bail. It was pointed out that Dr. Ram made disparaging remarks against students belonging to the Muslim and other marginalised communities, and also used to body shame students.
In the objection filed, several instances where the deceased was subjected to harassment at the hands of Dr. Ram are detailed. The accused had allegedly made adverse remarks against the deceased regarding his admission to the college on reservation and referred to him as "slum dog", which were intentionally made to humiliate Nithin, whom the accused knew belonged to SC/ST community.
Explaining the loan obtained through a digital app, it is stated that it was taken to meet urgent family medical requirements and educational requirements, and that it was not considered as an insurmountable financial burden.
After hearing the parties, the Court perused the statements made by several students, who spoke against many instances of cruelty by Dr. Ram. It also referred to the relevant statutory provisions and went on to uphold the decision of the Special Judge denying pre-arrest bail.
Rejecting the contention of the accused being subjected to media trial, it was observed:
"this Court fully disagree with the submission. The first reason for the same is that no Judge would be influenced by the media and all Judges would pass orders and judgments based on the records and evidence before them untrammelled by the media versions, in any manner. Secondly, 'Freedom of Press' is a constitutional right and the media is recognized as the fourth pillar of democracy. When the administrators conceal and suppress many illegalities and are acting in a biased manner, denying the legal, constitutional and personal rights of individuals, interference of the media, in fact, helped in correcting the illegalities and protecting the rights of the individuals; and when media would not interfere, those illegalities should not have been corrected."
While hearing the case, Justice Badharudeen had orally remarked that the students in medical colleges in the State were being treated cruelly. It was also orally suggested that a Committee can be constituted to inquire into allegations and form an opinion and then form guidelines or stipulations.
The Court reiterated the suggestion in the judgment as well:
"It is reliably learned that House Surgeons and Post Graduate students are posted in the hospitals throughout day and night for duties even denying a reasonable sleeping time and also denying a reasonable time to have their food in time in order to maintain their health intact. This is a very dangerous situation and a big menace to the society. In fact, the National Medical Commission, the Health Departments of the Central and State Governments, the Education and Higher Education Departments of the State and the Central Governments and the concerned Universities should take appropriate measures to address this menace and to avoid this dangerous and treacherous state of affairs in future. It is high time that the authorities must think of finding some solution or appointment of commission to address the issue, without fail, to ensure an unbiased forum where the colleges have no control to redress the grievance of the students."
Thus, the Court dismissed the appeal.
Case No: Crl.A 609/ 2026
Case Title: Dr. M.Kodanda Ram v. State and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 329
Counsel for the appellant: S. Rajeev, V. Vinay, M.S. Aneer, Anilkumar C.R., Sarath K.P., Dipa V., K.S. Kiran Krishnan, Akash Cherian Thomas, Azad Sunil, T.P. Aravind, Maheswar Padickal, Akshara S. and Nivedita Rajeev.
Counsel for the respondents - A. Parvathy Menon - for respondents 3 and 4 - Victim Rights Centre - KeLSA, Vipin Narayanan A. - Sr. Public Prosecutor