Madras High Court
Vikki @ Vignesh vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ... on 22 April, 2022
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
Vikki @ Vignesh ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Thoothukudi South Police Station,
Thoothukudi.
(Crime No.533 of 2019). ... 1st Respondent/
Complainant
2.P.K.Ramkumar ... 2nd Respondent/
Defacto Complainant
PRAYER : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, as
amended by Act 1 of 2016, to call for the records relating to
Cr.M.P.No.571 of 2021, dated 23.07.2021 on the file of the learned
Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial Cases under the Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi
and set aside the same and grant bail to the appellant.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
For R – 1 : Ms.M.Aasha
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For R – 2 : Mr.A.S.Vaigunth
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This Appeal is directed as against the order passed in
Cr.M.P.No.571 of 2021, dated 23.07.2021 on the file of the learned
Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial Cases under the Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi,
thereby dismissed the petition seeking bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased had
committed a murder of the first accused's brother. Due to that
enmity, on 21.08.2019, when the deceased came to the Court to
attend a case, the first accused along with other accused waylaid
him and committed murder. The first respondent registered the F.I.R
in Crime No.533 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 147, 148,
341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii) and 120(b) of I.P.C and Section 3(2)(v) of
the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities
Amendment) Act, 1989. After completion of investigation, filed final
report and the same has been taken cognizance in S.C.No.62 of
2020 and it is pending trial on the file of the learned Sessions
Judge, Special Court for Trial Cases under the Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
3.The appellant is arraigned as Accused No.13 and he was
arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.08.2019. The
appellant filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.571 of 2021, dated
23.07.2021 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court
for Trial Cases under the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi for bail and the same
was dismissed on 23.07.2021. Aggrieved by the same, the present
Criminal Appeal is filed.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would
submit that there is no specific overt act as against the appellant to
attract the major offences as alleged by the prosecution. The
appellant was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on
22.08.2019 and the co-accused, those who are standing in same
footing, namely Accused Nos.15 and 16 were granted bail by this
Court in Crl.A(MD)No.8 of 2020, by an order dated 24.02.2020 and
they are regularly appearing before the trial Court and as such, the
appellant may also be granted bail and he will attend all hearings of
the trial proceedings. He would further submit that even according
to the prosecution, the appellant was standing in his two-wheeler
and watching the arrival of the accused and as such, he had no
specific overt act in the alleged occurrence. In support of his
contention, he relied upon the Judgment of the Honourable
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
Supreme Court of India in the case of Jagjeet Singh and others
Vs. Ashish Mishra @ Monu and another [2022 Live Law (SC)
376], wherein the Honourable Supreme Court of India held as
follows:-
“40. Having held so, we cannot be oblivious to
what has been urged on behalf of the Respondent-
Accused that cancellation of bail by this Court is likely
to be construed as an indefinite foreclosure of his right
to seek bail. It is not necessary to dwell upon the
wealth of case law which, regardless of the stringent
provisions in a penal law or the gravity of the offence,
has time and again recognised the legitimacy of
seeking liberty from incarceration. To put it differently,
no accused can be subjected to unending detention
pending trial, especially when the law presumes him to
be innocent until proven guilty. Even where statutory
provisions expressly bar the grant of bail, such as in
cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,
1967, this Court has expressly ruled that after a
reasonably long period of incarceration, or for any
other valid reason, such stringent provisions will melt
down, and cannot be measured over and above the
right of liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution (See Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb, (2021)
3 SCC 713, ¶ 15 & 17).”
5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the
learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent and perused the materials available on record.
6.On a perusal of the records revealed that except Accused
Nos.15 and 16, others were not granted bail and they are
incarceration and this Court already directed the trial Court to
proceed with the trial and complete the same within the stipulated
time. Asfaras the appellant is concerned, he had very bad
antecedents and so far he involved in four cases including the
present case. The other co-accused are closely related to the
appellant and all are habitual offender and every year they
committed one murder case. The appellant has got direct
involvement in the brutal murder of the deceased. He is the close
relative of the first accused and conspired with all other persons to
murder the deceased on 09.08.2019 near FCI Roundana,
Thoothukudi and they attempted to murder the deceased.
Fortunately, it was failed and again on 21.08.2019, the appellant
conspired with other accused and brutally murdered the deceased.
In fact, the two-wheeler was driven by the appellant in which A.4
and A.9 came as pillion riders to cause murder of the deceased. The
two-wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-69-M-4389 was recovered
and as such, the appellant had a vital role in the present murder
case. Further, it revealed that the Accused No.21 absconded and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
case has been split up by the trial Court and given separate
S.C.No.195 of 2019. In fact, A.19, who was enlarged on bail, had
threatened the witnesses and separate case has been registered
against him in Crime No.730 of 2019 on the file of the Tuticorin
South Police Station. After completion of investigation in that case
filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance and it is
pending for trial in S.C.No.97 of 2020 on the file of the Special
Court for the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi.
7.The appellant had involved in the following criminal cases:-
“1.Pudukottai Police Station Crime No.145 of
2017 under Sections 147, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of
I.P.C.
2.Sawerpuram Police Station Crime No.22 of
2019 under Section 29 of I.P.C.
3.SIPCOT Police Station Crime No.116 of 2018
under Sections 107, 147, 148, 294(b), 307, 324 and
56(ii) of I.P.C.
4.South Police Station Crime No.533 of 2019
under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii) of
I.P.C read with Section 34, 109 of I.P.C and 3(2)(v)
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
8.The Honourable Supreme Court of India repeatedly held that
while considering the application for bail, the factors to be borne in
mind as follows:-
“(i) Whether there is any prima facie or
reasonable ground to believe that the accused had
committed the offence;
(ii) Nature and gravity of the accusation;
(iii) Severity of the punishment in the event of
conviction;
(iv) Danger of the accused absconding or fleeing,
if released on bail;
(v) Character, behaviour, means, position and
standing of the accused;
(vii) Reasonable apprehension of the witnesses
being influenced; and
(viii) Danger, of course, of justice being thwarted
by grant of bail.”
9.Further, another accused viz., A.2 had daringly threatened
the defacto complainant inside the Court campus, in which another
F.I.R has been registered in Crime No.176 of 2020 on the file of the
Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai Police Station, Tirunelveli and the
investigation is pending. The present murder is nothing but
retaliation murder since the brother of the defacto complainant was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
murdered due to previous murder. That apart, in the first attempt,
the accused persons were watching the movement of the deceased
and on the second attempt they executed murder in a day light.
10.Considering the nature of gravity of the day light murder
committed by the accused persons in public nearby Thoothukudi
Court campus and South Police Station, that too, it is a case of
retaliation murder and the severity of the punishment in the
conviction and the danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if
he is released on bail, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
appellant. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
22.04.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes
ps
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of
the order may be utilized
for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant
concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
To
1.The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial Cases under the
Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Thoothukudi South Police Station,
Thoothukudi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
ps
CRL.A.(MD).No.246 of 2022
22.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
