Referring to a 2022 bail order, Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan said that allowing bail in such instances would convey an unsuitable message to society. In the previous case, the court had directed the seven-time former legislator not to issue statements that might promote religious strife or hurt religious sentiments.
Yet, while appearing on a TV debate show on January 5 this year, George uttered provocative words by saying, "All Muslims in India are terrorists and communalists. Not a single non-terrorist Muslim resides in India. Muslims are looters who plunder the wealth of the country. Lakhs of Hindus and Christians were killed by Muslims in order to form a Muslim state. All Indian Muslims must move to Pakistan. All Muslims are communal demons and scoundrels."
Subsequent to these remarks, Muhammed Shihab, who is a resident of Erattupetta in Kottayam, filed a police complaint against George in terms of Sections 196(1)(a) and 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act.
The court pointed out that as George had already broken his earlier bail conditions, issuance of bail in this case may send the message that even if conditions are violated, anticipatory bail would remain a possibility. "Such a message should not go to society," the court added.
The court also weighed whether anticipatory bail must be issued in all cases, especially when custodial interrogation is not necessary for the investigation.
If the highest penalty for a suspected offense is below seven years, ought a court of law to allow bail without reference to the severity of the allegations and the accused's antecedents?" Justice Kunhikrishnan asked. "The accused's antecedents and the seriousness of the allegations are important considerations. While custodial interrogation may not always be the necessity, that by itself cannot be a ground for granting anticipatory bail," he further observed.
