M.Mani vs The State
2022 Latest Caselaw 5762 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5762 Mad
Judgement Date : 22 March, 2022

Madras High Court

M.Mani vs The State on 22 March, 2022

                                                                            Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 22.03.2022

                                                      CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

                                           Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

                     M.Mani                                    ... Appellant/Accused Rank not
                                                                   known in Crl.A.No.141/2022

                     G.Ganapathy                               ... Appellant/Accused Rank not
                                                                   known in Crl.A.No.142/2022
                                                    vs.
                     1.The State
                       rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                       Polur Sub Division,
                       Kadaladi,
                       Kadaladi Police Station,
                       Thiruvannamalai District.
                     2.The State
                       rep. by the Inspector of Police,
                       Kadaladi Police Station,
                       Thiruvannamalai District.
                       (Crime No.38 of 2022)

                     3.N.Muthuraman                              ...   Respondents in all Crl.As.

COMMON PRAYER: Criminal Appeals filed is filed under Section 14- A(2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Amendment Act, praying to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.21 & 20 of 2022 dated 07.02.2022, respectively, by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Thiruvannamalai

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

and consequently enlarge the appellants on bail in respect of Crime No.38 of 2022 on the file of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Polur Sub Division, Thiruvannamalai District.

For Appellant : Mr.S.B.Viswanathan For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

For Respondent-3 : Ms.K.Nithyashree

COMMON JUDGMENT Being dissatisfied with the order dated 07.02.2022 made in

Crl.M.P.Nos.21 and 20 of 2022, respectively, on the file of the Special

Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under Scheduled Castes and the

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Thiruvannamalai,

the appellants/accused in Crime No.38 of 2022 on the file of the Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Polur Sub Division, Thiruvannamalai District,

have preferred this appeal and praying to set aside the order dated

07.02.2022 and to enlarge them on bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.01.2022, due to the

dispute over carrying the dead bodies of persons of Arunthathiar

Community through the High road, the appellants and other accused, who

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

belong to the Vanniyar community, had entered into the area, wherein, the

defacto complainant and others were residing and caused damage to the

vehicles, windows and doors. For the said incident, the second respondent

police has registered a case in Crime No.38 of 2022 for the offences

punishable under Sections 294(b), 147, 148, 324, 307 I.P.C. and Section

3(1)(za)(A), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act 2016 and Section 3(1) of

TNPPDL Act, 1992. Afterwards, the appellants were secured on

29.01.2022, and remanded to judicial custody. The earlier bail application

filed before the Special Court for trial of cases under SC/ST(POA) Act,

Tiruvannamalai was dismissed by an order dated 07.02.2022. Challenging

the impugned order dated 07.02.2022, the appellants are before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the

appellants are innocent persons and no way connected with the occurrence

as alleged by the prosecution. As of now, the investigation in this case has

been completed and the appellants are the only bread winner of their family.

It is the further submission that the appellants are ready to abide any

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

conditions imposed by this Court and accordingly, he prayed to set aside the

impugned order dated 07.02.2022, and to enlarge them on bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for

the respondent/Police raised objection stating that some of the accused, who

committed the alleged occurrence, were absconded and as of now, the

investigation has not been completed. However, he admits that the alleged

occurrence had happened due to the emotional feelings of the villagers.

5. Ms.K.Nithyasree, learned counsel appearing for the defacto

complainant has also raised objection stating that if this type of appellants

are released on bail, they may try to tamper the witnesses and hamper the

investigation. According to her, as of now, the dispute having by the defacto

complainant with the appellants are pending before the Revenue Divisional

Officer and in this regard, a Peace Committee has also been arranged.

6. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on

either side are considered.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

7. The averments found in the First Information Report shows

that during the relevant point of time, the appellants and other accused, who

belong to the same village, in an emotional mood, joined together and

obstructed the people, who belong to the community of the defacto

complainant and attempted to restrain them from carrying the dead body.

Therefore, in the said circumstances, whether the appellants are having the

intention to abuse the defacto complainant and others, is a matter for trial. In

other words, considering the period of incarceration, further custody of the

appellants are not necessary for completing the investigation. As of now, the

appellants are in incarceration from 29.01.2022. Further after registering the

case, no such events had happened in the occurrence place.

8. Hence, taking note of all the above said aspects into

consideration, and having regard to the nature of offence committed by the

appellants and also by considering the period of incarceration, this Court is

inclined to grant bail to the appellants subject to certain conditions.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

9. Accordingly, the appellants are ordered to be released on

bail subject to the following conditions;

(a) the appellants shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under SC/ST(POA) Act, Thiruvannamalai.

(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 appellants shall appear before the Srivilliputhur Town Police Station, daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. Further, the appellants should not enter into the occurrence place without the permission of this Court.

(d) the appellants shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) 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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.141 & 142 of 2022

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];