Madras High Court
Arumugam vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ... on 31 December, 2021
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 31.12.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
1. Arumugam
2. Kuppan @ Dinesh Kumar
3. Dhanalakshmi
4. R.Sudha
5. R.Arun Kumar ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Madurandhagam.
2. The State Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
Cheyyur Police Station,
Chengalpatty District.
(Crime No.393/2021) ...Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct
the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (PoA) Cases, Chengalpattu
District, to consider the petitioners' bail application in Crime No.393 of 2021 on
the file of the respondent police, on the same day, in the event of their
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/11
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
surrender.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Selvanandam
For Respondents : Mr.J.Subbiah
Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
******
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking direction to the learned Sessions
Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (PoA) Cases, Chengalpattu District, to consider
the petitioners' bail application in Crime No.393 of 2021 on the file of the
respondent police, on the same day, in the event of their surrender.
2 The respondent police registered a case against the petitioners for
the offence under Sections 147, 447, 294(b), 506(i) of IPC r/w Section 3(i)(s) of
SC/ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015 in Crime No.393 of 2021. Since the
petitioners apprehend arrest by the respondent police in the above case, filed
this petition invoking Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to direct the Court below
to consider the bail application, on the same day, in the event of their surrender.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
3 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned Government Advocate (Crl.Sid) appearing for the respondents and
perused the materials available on record.
4 It is seen that the respondent police registered the present case
against the petitioners for the offence 147, 447, 294(b), 506(i) of IPC r/w
Section 3(i)(s) of SC/ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015 in Crime No.393 of
2021. It is to be noted that, if the accused charged for the offence under the
Special Act viz. SC/ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015, Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
would not apply and it is barred by the Special Act. It is useful to refer Sections
18 to 21 of the SC/ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015:
18. Section 438 of the Code not to apply to persons
committing an offence under the Act - Nothing in section 438
of the Code shall apply in relation to any case of the code
involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of
having committed an offence under this Act.
18. A. No enquiry or approval requirement – (1) For
the purpose of this Act -
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
(a) preliminary enquiry shall not be required for
registration of a First Information Report against any
person; or
(b) the Investigating officer shall not require approval
for the arrest, if necessary, of any person,
against whom an accusation of having committed an
offence under this Act has been made and no prcodure other
than that provided under this Act or the Code shall apply.
(2) The provisions of section 438 of Code shall not
apply to a case under this Act, notwithstanding any
judgment or order or direction of any Court.
19. Section 360 of the Code or the provision of the
Probation of Offenders Act not to apply to persons guilty of
an offence under the Act – The provisions of Section 360 of
the Code and the provisions of the Probations of Offenders
Act, 1958 (20 of 1958) shall not apply to any person above the
age of eighteen who is found guilty of having committed an
offence under this Act.
20. Act to override other laws – Save as otherwise
provided in this Act, the provisions of this Act shall have effect
notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
any other law for the time being in force or any custom or usage
or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law.
21. Duty of Government to ensure effective implementation
of the Act. - (1) Subject to such rules as the Central
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
Government may make in this behalf, the State Government
shall take such measures as may be necessary for the effective
implementation of this Act.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of
the foregoing provisions, such measures may include, -
(i)the provision for adequate facilities, including legal
aid, to the persons subjected to atrocities to enable them to
avail themselves of justice;
(ii) the provision for travelling and maintenance
expenses to witnesses, including the victims of atrocities,
during investigation and trial of offences under this Act;
(iii) the provision for the economic and social
rehabilitation of the victims of the atrocities;
(iv) the appointment of officers for initiating or
exercising supervision over prosecutions for the contravention
of the provisions of this Act;
(v) the setting up of committees at such appropriate
levels as the State Government may think fit to assist that
Government in formulation or implementation of such
measures,
(vi) provision for a periodic survey of the working of
the provisions of this Act with a view to suggesting measures
for the better implementation of the provisions of this Act;
(vii) the identification of the areas where the members of the
Scheduled Casetes and the Scheduled Tribes are likely to be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
subjected to atrocities and adoption of such measures so as to
ensure safety for such members.
(3) The Central Government shall take such steps as
may be necessary to co-ordinate the measures taken by the
State Governments under sub-section (1).
(4) The Central Government shall, every year, place on
the table of each House of parliament a report on the
measures taken by itself and by the State Governments in
pursuance of the provisions of this section.
Therefore, Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is barred by the Special Act.
5 Further, it is relevant to refer to Section 15-A(3) and (5) of the
Act, which reads as follows:
“(3).A Victim or his dependent shall have the right to
reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any Court
proceeding including any bail proceeding and the Special
Public Prosecutor or the State Government shall inform the
victim about any proceedings under this Act.
(5)A victim or his dependent shall be entitled to be
heard at any proceeding under this Act in respect of bail,
discharge, release, parole, conviction or sentence of an
accused or any connected proceedings or arguments and file
written submission on conviction, acquittal or sentencing.”
On reading of the above provisions of the Special Act, it is clear that before
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
considering the bail application, the victim or his dependent should be heard
and they should be given opportunity to offer their objections/representations. It
is seen that the petitioners did not even add the defacto complaint in this
petition as party. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the
petitioners, in order to bye-pass the above two provisions of the Special Act,
with an intention to escape from the clutches of law, have invoked Section 482
of Cr.P.C. for getting bail. Unfortunately, the Investigating Officers are also
aiding the accused to escape from the clutches of law and the culprits with
connivance of the Investigating Officer, are managing to escape from the arrest.
6 Further, the enormous power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should
not be invoked automatically and the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
should be exercised sparingly. When there is specific bar under the Special Act,
this Court cannot ignore the intention of the Legislators and the purpose of
enactment of the Special Act.
7 Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to invoke
Section 482 of Cr.P.C., which would amount to ignoring the provisions of the
Special Act. Therefore, this petition shall stand dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
8 On 29.12.2021, when the matter was taken up for hearing, this
Court directed the respondent police to produce the petitioners/accused before
this Court on 31.12.2021.
9 Accordingly, today i.e. 31.12.2021, when the matter is taken up for
hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the
respondents would submit that the calls of the petitioners Cell Phones are being
traced out by the respondent police and hence seeks some more time to secure
the petitioners.
10 It is seen that the occurrence has taken place on 19.12.2021 and
the FIR has been registered on 20.12.2021 and the respondent police did not
take any steps to secure the accused. Even after directions of this Court also the
Investigating Officer did not take any effective steps to arrest the accused, which
shows lethargic attitude of the Investigating Officer. Further, it is to be noted
that the petitioners/accused have filed the present petition seeking to consider
their bail application, in the event of their surrenders, which means they are
readily available in their local area. The Investigating Officer, with an intention
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
to help the petitioners/accused to escape from the clutches of law, did not secure
them. Further, there is a prima facie case made out for arresting the accused,
the Investigating Officer neither care to Section 18-A of the Act nor the order of
this Court dated 29.12.2021, for which, this Court highly contemn the
Investigating Officer.
11 Therefore, the Inspector General of Police, under whose control the
Investigating Officer is working, is directed to take departmental action against
the Investigating Officer and file an Action Taken Report on the same before
this Court preferably before the second week of January 2022.
List the matter in the second week of January 2022.
31.12.2021
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Note: Issue order copy on 06.01.2022
cgi
To
1. The Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (PoA) Cases,
Chengalpattu District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Madurandhagam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
3. The Inspector of Police, Cheyyur Police Station,
Chengalpatty District.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5. The Inspector General of Police, Chengalpattu District.
P.VELMURUGAN, J.,
cgi
Crl.O.P.No. 26016 of 2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26016 of 2021
31.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
