Madras High Court

Elavarsan vs The State Rep By Its on 8 December, 2021

                                                                              Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 08.12.2021

                                                     CORAM

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

                                              Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

                     Elavarsan                                            ... Appellant
                                                            Vs.
                     1. The State Rep by its
                        The Inspector of Police,
                        Mappadu Police Station,
                       Thiruvallur District.
                       (Crime No.469 of 2021).

                     2. Revathy                                           ...Respondents

                     PRAYER: The Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14 A of SC/ST
                     Act 1989 and 1 of 2016 Amended Act, to set aside the order passed in
                     Crl.M.P. No.4444 of 2021 dated 23.10.2021 on the file of Principal
                     District & Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases
                     registered under Sc/ST prevention of Atrocities Act, Thiruvallur,
                     Thiruvallur District and enlarge the Appellant on bail in Crime No.469 of
                     20 on the file of respondent police.
                                  For Petitioner     : Mr.K.G.Senthilkumar
                                  For Respondents : Mr. S.Sugendran for R1
                                                   Government Advocate(Crl.Side)
                                                   R2-No Appearance.


                     1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

                                                     JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the dismissal of the

bail application by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Tiruvallur in Crl.M.P. No. 4444 of 2021 dated 23.10.2021

2. The case of the prosecution is that as per the defacto

complainant Revathi, the mother of the deceased Jayashree is that her

daughter had completed B.B.A and was working in TVS Supply Chain

Sol Company and that she had gone to duty on 24.09.2021 at 01.00 p.m.

While the defacto complainant was expecting her daughter to come back

after duty, she did not come back and she was under the impression that

she would finish her night duty and come back on the next day. Even on

the next day, her daughter did not come back home and her mobile was

also switched off and thereafter, the defacto complainant along with her

friends had searched for her daughter and that she had found her

daughter hanging herself from a tree near the water channel behind her

house. The defacto complainant further stated that her daughter was

having love affair with one Elavarasan of Vanniyar community and that

he had been withdrawing amounts from the daughter's ATM card and her

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

daughter's mobile phone also not found and thereby she had suspected

that the said Elavarasan would be the reason for her daughter's death.

Based on her complaint, a case in Crime No.469 of 2021 was registered

under Sections174 of Cr.P.C. (hanging). During the course of

investigation, it was found that the accused who was having a love affair

with the deceased, had refused to marry her stating that she belongs to

scheduled caste community due to which, the victim had committed

suicide. The case was thereafter altered to one under 306 I.P.C. Read

with 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST, Prevention of Atrocities

Act, 1989 and the appellant/accused was arrested on 26.09.2021 and

remanded to the judicial custody on the same day. The accused had filed

Crl.M.P.No.4444 of 2021 before the learned Principal District and

Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur and the learned Judge by order dated

23.10.2021, had dismissed the same, against which, the present appeal

has been filed.

3.Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

appellant and the victim hail from the same village and that they are

known to each other for a long time. The appellant and the victim had

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

love affair for more than three years. The appellant had in fact proposed

to marry the victim whereas the family of the victim had refused the

marriage of her daughter with the appellant stating that the appellant

belongs to a different community. The victim who was depressed by the

refusal of her parents had committed suicide whereas false complaint had

been given as if the appellant had refused the marriage. He would

further submit that except the statements of three witnesses who were

stated to have told that they have overheard the conversation between the

victim and the appellant and they heard that the appellant had refused to

marry her, no other direct evidence is available in this case to prove the

fact that the appellant refused to marry the victim on account of her

belonging to the scheduled caste community. The statements recorded

from the witnesses is also not believable. He would further submit that

the petitioner is in custody for more than 72 days and major part of the

investigation is also over and thereby seek that the appeal may be

allowed and the appellant may be released on bail.

4. Per contra, Mr.S.Sugendran, learned Government

Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent would submit that

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

the appellant belongs to the Vanniyar community and the victim

Jayashree belongs to the Scheduled Caste community. They belong to

the same village. The appellant had love affair with the victim for about

three years and he had also sexual intercourse with her and thereafter, he

had refused to marry her on account of the victim belonging to the SC

community. Further, the appellant is also using the ATM card belonging

to the victim had withdrawn the amounts. The victim had spoken to the

appellant over telephone requesting him to marry her whereas he had

refused to marry her stating that she belongs to the different caste and

that he would not be able to marry her. Since the victim was

heartbroken, she had committed suicide by hanging. The conversation

between the appellant and the victim was overheard by one Jeeva,

Thilothaman and Lakshmanan, who were colleagues of the appellant,

while they were travelling in the bus. He would further submit that the

investigation is almost over.

5. Notice has been ordered for the second respondent and it has

been served and her name is printed in the causelist. There is no

representation for the second respondent. Heard the learned counsel for

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

the appellant and the learned Government Advocate (crl side) appearing

for the first respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6.The case of the prosecution is that the appellant and the victim

were in love with each other for three years and that after having sexual

intercourse, the appellant had refused to marry the victim citing her caste

and she had committed suicide. Major part of the investigation is over.

Taking into consideration the facts and submissions made, this Court is

of the opinion that this is a case where the appeal can be allowed and the

bail can be granted to the appellant.

7. In view of the above, the order dated 23.10.2021 passed in

Crl.M.P. No.4444 of 2021 stands set aside and the Criminal Appeal

stands allowed and this Court is inclined to grant bail to the

appellant/accused.

(a) Accordingly, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail on

condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Thousand only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the

satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases registered under Sc/ST

prevention of Atrocities Act, Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District and on

further conditions that:

(b) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(c) the appellant on his release from prison shall stay at Villupuram District and appear before Villupuram Town Police station, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The appellant shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of the respondent police station.

(d) the appellant shall not abscond during trial;

(e) the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness during trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellant in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellant released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.559 of 2021

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J., vri/shk

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered

under Section 229A IPC.

08.12.2021

Note:Issue copy on 08.12.2021 vri/shk To

1. Principal District & Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases registered under Sc/ST prevention of Atrocities Act, Thiruvallur.

2. The Inspector of Police, Mappadu Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

(Crime No.469 of 2021).

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

4. The Record Keeper High Court, Madras.

Crl.A.No. 559 of 2021