Mayakannan vs State Through The
2021 Latest Caselaw 20698 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 20698 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 October, 2021

Madras High Court

Mayakannan vs State Through The on 7 October, 2021

                                                                                Crl. A(MD)No.385 of 2021


                             BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                  DATED : 07.10.2021

                                                      CORAM:s

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

                                              Crl. A(MD) No. 385 of 2021


                     Mayakannan                                  : Appellant/Petitioner No.2/
                                                                    Accused No.2

                                                          Vs.

                     1.State through the
                       Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                       Thiruchuzhi Sub-Division,
                       Virudhunagar District.

                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Veeracholan Police Station,
                       Virudhunagar District.
                       (In Crime No.27 of 20201)                : Respondents 1 & 2/Respondents
                                                                   1 & 2/Complainants

                     3.Mari Ganesh                          : 3rd Respondent /3rd Respondent/
                                                                De-facto Complainant
                     PRAYER: The Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14-A(ii) of SC/ST
                     (POA) Act, 1989, to call for the records relating to the order dated
                     30.07.2021 made in Cr.M.P.No.1184 of 2021 on the file of the Learned
                     Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act Cases,
                     Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur and set aside the same and enlarge
                     the appellant on bail.

                     1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                  Crl. A(MD)No.385 of 2021




                                   For Appellants      : Mr.V.Sasi Kumar
                                   For R1 & R2         : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar
                                                         Additional Public Prosecutor

                                                        JUDGMENT

The present Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the

impugned order, dated 30.07.2021 made in Crl.M.P.No.1184 of 2021 in

Cr.No.27 of 2021 of Veeracholan Police Station.

2. The appellant/petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in the above

referred crime number. The said case has been registered against this

petitioner and other accused under Sections 294(b), 323, 379 of IPC and

Section 3(1)(r), 3(i)(s) and 3(ii)(va) of SC & ST Act. After registering the

FIR, the petitioner herein voluntarily surrendered before the trial Court and

filed an application under Section 437 of Cr.P.C., wherein, he praying to

enlarge the bail. In view of the impugned order dismissed the application

filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is in incarceration from 30.07.2021.

Challenging the said order, the appellant prepared this appeal before this

Court. After filing this appeal, notice is duly served to the third respondent,

who is the defacto complainant in the above referred crime number.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl. A(MD)No.385 of 2021

3. Today, when this appeal is came up for hearing, there is no

representation on the side of the third respondent.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant appeared before this Court through Video Conferencing and made

the submission as for the past 69 days, the appellant was in judicial custody.

He would further submit that the appellant is a first offender and as of now,

the portion of the investigation has been completed and therefore, prayed

for enlarging the petitioner on bail.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

respondents 1 & 2 would submit that the major portion of the investigation

has been completed and as of now 11 witnesses were examined on the side

of the prosecution.

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned

counsels appearing on either side.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl. A(MD)No.385 of 2021

7. Now, on going through the impugned order dated 30.07.2021,

passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act

Cases, Virudhunagar District, it appears that nothing was averred about the

previous antecedents of the present appellant. After mentioning the reason

that the other accused in this case is having one previous case under Section

302 I.P.C., dismissing this petition is not necessary. However, as of now,

the co-accused in this case, who is having previous case was released on

bail by this Court. More than that, considering the period of incarceration,

further custodial interrogation is not necessary for completing the

investigation.

8. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order,

dated 30.07.2021 made in Crl.M.P.No.1184 of 2021 on the file of the

learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act Cases,

Virudhungar District.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order,

dated 30.07.2021 made in Crl.M.P.No.1184 of 2021 on the file of the

learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act Cases,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl. A(MD)No.385 of 2021

Virudhungar District, is set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on

bail on his executing 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 Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act

Cases, Virudhungar District, and on further condition that:

[a] the appellant shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[b] the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[c] the appellant shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

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



                                                                                     07.10.2021

                     Index    : Yes/No
                     Internet : Yes/No
                     am

                     Note: Issue Order copy on 08.10.2021


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                           Crl. A(MD)No.385 of 2021




                     To:-