Madras High Court
Udhayakumar vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ... on 25 August, 2021
CRL A No.388 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.08.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Criminal Appeal No.388 of 2021
Udhayakumar ...Appellant/Accused-1
Vs.
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Ranipet Taluk
Vellore District
2.State by
The Inspector of Police
All Women Police Station
Ranipet District
Crime No.11 of 2021
3.Malathi ...Respondent / Complainant
Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(a) of SC / ST Act,
seeking to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.254 of 2021 dated
10.08.2021 and enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.11 of 2021 on
the file of the The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station,
Ranipet District.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Silambu Selvan
For Respondents 1&2 : Mr.S.Sugendran
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRL A No.388 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(The case has been heard through video conference)
The Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the order
passed in Crl.M.P.No.254 of 2021 dated 10.08.2021 on the file of the
learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST
Act, Vellore, and to enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.11 of 2021
on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ranipet
District.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant on the false
promise of marrying the defacto complainant stayed with her several
times and she was subjected to the whims of the appellant. Thereafter,
when she insisted the appellant to marry her, he along with the other
accused abused her by uttering her caste name and thereby, cheated the
defacto complainant and spoiled her entire life. Therefore, the defacto
complainant lodged a complaint and the respondent police registered a
case against the appellant and other accused in Crime No.11 of 2021
initially for the offences punishable under Sections 417 IPC read with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRL A No.388 of 2021
Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i) of SC/ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015 and
later altered into Sections 417, 376 IPC read with Sections 3(1)(s),
3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015.
During the pendency of the investigation, the appellant along with other
accused filed a petition before the designated Court in Crl.M.P.No.254
of 2021 seeking for bail and the same was allowed as against the other
accused and it was dismissed as against the appellant herein by order
dated 10.08.2021. Challenging the said dismissal order, the appellant has
filed the present appeal before this Court.
3. The learned Counsel for appellant would submit that the
appellant along with three others had filed a petition before this Court in
Crl.O.P.No.12209 of 2021 seeking for a direction to the designated
Court to accept their surrender and to consider their bail application on
the same day. Subsequently, the same was allowed and the petitioners
therein were directed to surrender before the trial Court and a direction
was issued to the trial Court to consider the matter on the same day on
merit by order dated 15.07.2021. Accordingly, the appellant and the other
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRL A No.388 of 2021
accused surrendered before the designated Court by filing a petition in
Crl.M.P.No.254 of 2021 seeking for bail whereas, the learned Sessions
Judge, granted bail to the other three petitioners and dismissed the same
insofar as the appellant is concerned. He would submit that the appellant
is working in Army and he has not committed any offence as alleged by
the prosecution and that a false case has been foisted against the
appellant. Hence, he prays that the petition may be allowed.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that
the appellant is arrayed as A1. The appellant had fell in love with the
defacto complainant and had promised to marry her. Subsequently, when
she insisted the appellant to marry her, he along with the other accused
humiliated her with her caste name and also abused her and thereby,
cheated the defacto complainant and spoiled her entire life. He would
submit that though the other accused were granted bail, the appellant is
the prime accused in this case and there is a specific overt-act against the
appellant and thereby, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly dismissed
the petition. Further, the investigation is at the preliminary state and if the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRL A No.388 of 2021
appellant is released on bail at this stage, there is every possibility of the
appellant tampering the witnesses which would affect the course of
investigation. Hence, he prays for the dismissal of the appeal.
5. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned
Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police
and perused the materials on record.
6. Perusal of record shows that the appellant has been arrayed as
A1 in this case. Considering the serious nature of offence and the stage
of investigation and that there is a specific overt-act against the
appellant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the appellant.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeals is dismissed.
25.08.2021
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
ksa-2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRL A No.388 of 2021
P.VELMURUGAN, J
ksa-2
To
1. The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST Act,
Vellore,
2.The Inspector of Police
All Women Police Station
Ranipet District
3.The Public Prosecutor Officer, High Court, Madras.
4.The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court, Madras.
Criminal Appeal No.388 of 2021
25.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
