Vignesh vs State Represented By
2022 Latest Caselaw 6702 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6702 Mad
Judgement Date : 31 March, 2022

Madras High Court

Vignesh vs State Represented By on 31 March, 2022

                                                                                    Crl.A.No.317 of 2022



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 31.03.2022

                                                         CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

                                                 Crl.A.No.317 of 2022

                     Vignesh                                                   ... Appellant/A20

                                                             vs.

                     1.State Represented by
                       The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                       Kitchipalayam Police Station,
                       Salem 636 015
                       (crime No.1182 of 2020)
                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Kitchipalayam Police Station,
                       Salem
                     3.Jansirani                                         ...     Respondents

                     PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Schedule
                     Castes and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 praying
                     to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.669 of 2022 dated 21.02.2022
                     on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem and enlarge the
                     appellant on bail in Crime No.1182 of 2020 on the file of the first
                     respondent police.
                                     For Appellant           : Mr.P.Rajkumar




                     1/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                Crl.A.No.317 of 2022



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

                                  For Respondent-3         :   No appearance

                                                     JUDGMENT

Being dissatisfied with the order dated 21.02.2022 made in

Crl.M.P.No.669 of 2022, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge,

Salem, the appellant/A20 in Crime No.1182 of 2020 on the file of the first

respondent Police, has preferred this appeal praying to set aside the order

dated 21.02.2022 and to enlarge him on bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's

husband Selladurai is a rowdy element and there was enmity between the

defacto complainant's husband's group and one Suriyamoorthy group. Due

to previous enmity, on 22.12.2020 at about 7.30 p.m., when the defacto

complainant's husband was proceeding along with the defacto complainant

and one, Valarmathi in his car on Appar Street, the appellant and other

accused came with 'veecharuval' in cars and two wheelers and waylaid the

car, in which the defacto complainant, her husband and one, Valarmathi

were proceeding, and attacked the defacto complainant's husband with

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.317 of 2022

'veecharuval'. Immediately, the defacto complainant's husband was brought

to the hospital, wherein the doctor declared him as dead. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would

submit that the appellant is an innocent person and he has been falsely

implicated in this case. He would further submit that the other accused who

are all involved in the alleged occurrence are already granted bail by this

Court and as of now, the respondent police after completing investigation,

filed final report. According to him, the appellant is in judicial custody from

23.12.2020 onwards. Hence, he prays for bail to the appellant by allowing

this criminal appeal.

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

the respondent/Police fairly admits that as of now, investigation has been

completed in this case. Further, the appellant is the first accused. However,

he opposes this appeal saying that apart from the offence under the

provisions of SC/ST Act, offence under Section 302 of IPC is also been

registered against the appellant.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.317 of 2022

5. Submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on

either side are considered.

6. Admittedly, the appellant is the first accused. Totally 32

accused are involved in the alleged occurrence. From where, some of them

already granted with bail. As of now, investigation has been completed and

charge sheet also filed before the trial court.

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

consideration, particularly on considering the period of incarceration, also

due to the reason that some of the accused are already granted with bail, this

Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant by allowing this criminal

appeal.

8. Accordingly, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail

subject to the following conditions;

(a) the appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.317 of 2022

(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 appellant shall appear before the trial court i.e. learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

(d) the appellant 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 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];