Mohan Sandhosh Durai vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 23394 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 23394 Mad
Judgement Date : 30 November, 2021

Madras High Court

Mohan Sandhosh Durai vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ... on 30 November, 2021

                                                            1

                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   Date : 30.11.2021.

                                                         CORAM

                                     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

                                                   Crl.A.No.570 of 2021


                     Mohan Sandhosh Durai                                    ...     Appellant

                                                             vs.

                     State represented by
                     1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                       DSP Office, Pennagaram Police Station,
                       Pennagaram,
                       Dharmapuri District.

                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Pennagaram Police Station,
                       Dharmapuri District.
                       (Crime No.422 of 2021)

                     3.Kumar                                                   ...    Respondents


                                  Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled
                     Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
                     Act, to set aside the order dated 02.11.2021 in Cr.M.P.No.1781 of
                     2021, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri
                     and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.422 of 2021 on the file
                     of the Respondent Police.


                                  For Appellant              : Mr.N.Ponraj




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                               2

                                  For Respondents 1 and 2      : Mr.S.Sugendran
                                                                 Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                  For Respondent No.3          : No appearance.

                                                          JUDGMENT

The Appeal has been filed against the dismissal of the bail

application in Crl.M.P.No.1781 of 2021, dated 02.11.2021 passed by

the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri.

2. The appellant, sole accused in the case in Crime No.422 of

2021 had been arrested by the Respondent Police for the offence

under Sections 294(b), 324, 341 & 506(ii) IPC read with Section

3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 registered by

the respondent on the complaint of one Kumar. The appellant was

arrested on 22.9.2021.

3. The case of the prosecution is as under:-

The de facto complainant is a resident of Chekkumedu Village

and that he has got two sons and two daughters and that he is

working as a driver in a School. His son Ilantamil and one Pandian are

neighbours and that his son is working as Cleaner in the Tata Ace

driven by Pandian. Whileso, the said Pandian had eloped with one

Renuka on 20.9.2021. The accused, who had suspected that the de

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

facto complainant's son Ilantamil had helped the said Pandian in the

elopement, had gone to his house and abused him calling his caste

name and assaulted him with iron rod causing fracture in his ankle.

By that time, the neighbours had intervened and separated, however,

the accused had threatened to do away with him and thereby, the de

facto complainant had lodged a complaint and as a result, the

appellant/accused was arrested by the respondent police. The

appellant had filed a Crl.M.P.No.1781 of 2021 seeking for bail before

the Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri and the Court, by order

dated 2.11.2021, dismissed the bail application against which the

present Appeal has been filed.

4. Mr.N.Ponraj, learned counsel appearing for the appellant

submitted that it is a case and counter case. He would submit that the

de facto complainant's son Ilantamil and his friend Pandian had

kidnapped the sister of one Vinoth, who is a relative of the appellant

and when the said Vinoth had gone to the house of the de facto

complainant on 21.9.2021 in search of his sister, the de facto

complainant had assaulted him with iron rod and thereby the said

Vinoth had sustained injuries and had been admitted in the

Government Hospital, Pennagaram. He would also submit that the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

appellant being a Law Student and relative of Vinoth, had preferred a

complaint against the de facto complainant and his family members in

respect of which a case in Crime No.421 of 2021 was registered by the

respondent. He would submit that in the said earlier incident, the de

facto complainant had also sustained injuries and taking advantage of

that, the de facto complainant had foisted a complaint against the

appellant. He would further submit that the present complaint has

been given only to prevent the appellant from helping the family

members of Vinoth.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that

the appellant had been in custody from 22.9.2021 and the de facto

complainant has been discharged on 13.10.2021. He would further

submit that the appellant has no previous case against him and the

present complaint is only an offshoot against the earlier complaint

given by him.

6. Mr.S.Sugendran, learned Government Advocate (Criminal

Side) appearing for respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the

appellant is a relative of one Vinoth and the said Vinoth's sister Renuka

had eloped with one Pandian. Suspecting that the son of the de facto

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

complainant had assisted the said Pandian in the elopement, the

accused had gone to the house of the de facto complainant and abused

him by calling by his caste name and had also assaulted him with an

iron rod due to which, the de facto complainant had suffered a fracture

in his right ankle. He would further submit that the de facto

complainant has been discharged from the Hospital on 13.10.2021.

He would submit that the appellant is a Law College Student and that

he has no previous cases against him.

7. Despite service of private notice to the third respondent and

his name being printed in the cause list, there is no appearance for the

third respondent.

8. Taking into consideration the submissions that it is a case and

counter case and that the victim has also been discharged from the

Hospital, this court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant. The

appellant is directed to be released on bail on the following

conditions:-

i. The appellant shall execute 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 Principal Sessions

Judge, Dharmapuri.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

ii. the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb

Impression in the surety bond and the learned Judge may

obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to

ensure their identity.

iii. The appellant, on his release from prison, shall stay at Dharmapuri and report before the Dharmapuri Town Police Station everyday at 6.30 pm for a period of two weeks and thereafter before the second respondent police on every Monday at 6.30 pm until further orders. iv. The appellant shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

v. The appellant shall not abscond during trial. vi. The appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness during trial.

vii.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/rial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala ((2005) AIR SCW 5560).