Madras High Court
Sathiya Raj vs The State Represented By Its on 6 April, 2023
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATE : 06.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
Sathiya Raj ... Appellant/1st Accused
Vs.
1.The State represented by its
The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Muthukulathur,
Ramanathapuram District. ... 1st Respondent/Investigation
Officer
2.The Inspector of Police,
Muthukulathur Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.49 of 2023) ... 2nd Respondent/Complainant
3.Gunasekaran ... 3rd Respondent/Defacto
Complainant
Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (PoA)
Act 1989 as amended by Act 1/2016, to call for the entire records in relating to
the impugned order dated 20.03.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.342 of 2023 on the
file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of cases registered
under SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 Ramanathapuram and to set aside the same and
consequently to release the appellant on bail in connection with the FIR in
Crime No.49 of 2023 on the file of the second respondent police.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
For Appellant : Mr.S.Jeyakarthik
For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Sivakumar
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For R3 : Mr.C.Gangai Amaran
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal is directed against the order passed in
Cr.M.P.No.342 of 2023 dated 20.03.2023 by the learned Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial of Cases Registered under SC/ST (POA) Act,
Ramanathapuram (FAC).
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.03.2023, the appellant
along with the other accused had attacked the third respondent/defacto
complainant with deadly weapons and abused him by using his caste name and
also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the third respondent
registered a case against three named persons including the appellant and 7
unnamed persons in Crime No.49 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 147,
294(b), 323 and 506(1) IPC r/w Sections 3(l)(r) and 3(l)(s) of SC/ST
(Amendment 2015) Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that
the appellant is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by
the prosecution. He would further submit that it is not the case of the
communal rivalry, but only between youngsters.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent has filed a
counter affidavit, wherein, it has been stated that investigation is not yet
completed and the same is in initial stage and hence, the custodial
interrogation of the appellant is very much required.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for
the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that there are totally 6 accused, out of,
the accused 2, 5 and 6 are the juveniles and the accused 3 and 4, in pursuance
of the direction of this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.5215 and 5222 of 2023
dated 20.03.2023, have surrendered before the concerned Court and were
released on bail. He would further submit that the appellant is not having any
previous cases for the similar offence or for any other serious offence and that
no one was injured seriously in the incident.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances and also the facts
that the appellant is in judicial custody from 09.03.2023 and that the appellant
is not having any previous cases for similar offence or serious offence, this
Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order, dated
20.03.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.342 of 2023 on the file of the learned
Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases Registered under SC/ST
(POA) Act, Ramanathapuram (FAC).
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order dated
20.03.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.342 of 2023 on the file of the learned
Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases Registered under SC/ST
(POA) Act, Ramanathapuram (FAC), is set aside. The appellant is ordered to
be released on bail on his executing 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 Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases
Registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramanathapuram, and on further
conditions that:
[a]the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left
Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Sessions
Judge may obtain a copy of their valid identity card to ensure
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
their identity.
[b]the appellant shall appear before the respondent
police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.
[c]the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or
witness either during investigation or trial.
[d]the appellant shall co-operate with the
investigation.
[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the
learned Sessions Judge/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 Sessions Judge/Trial Court
himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR
can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
06.04.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
csm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J.
csm
To
1.The Superintendent,
District Jail,
Muthukulathur.
2.The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial of Cases Registered under SC/ST (POA) Act,
Ramanathapuram (FAC).
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Muthukulathur,
Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police,
Muthukulathur Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Crl.A.(MD)No.253 of 2023
06.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
