Madras High Court
M.Anandarasu @ Anandaraj vs The Superintendent Of Police on 1 December, 2023
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.A.No.1289 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.12.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.A.No.1289 of 2023
M.Anandarasu @ Anandaraj,
S/o.Manickam ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police,
Nagapattinam District.
2.The State
Represented by Inspector of Police,
Keelaiyur Police Station,
Nagapattinam.
(Crime No.258/2009).
3.M.Sundarraj ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14(A) of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, to set
aside the order dated 03.11.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.3383 of 2023 on
the file of learned District and Sessions, Judge at Nagapattinam and
consequently, enlarge the appellant on bail in the above Crime
No.252/2023, pending investigation on the file of 1st respondent Police.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Deivasigamani for Ms.D.Geetha
For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.Damodaran,
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R3 : No Appearance
Page No.1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.1289 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the impugned
order in Crl.M.P.No.3383 of 2023, dated 03.11.2023 passed by the
learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam and enlarge the
appellant on bail in connection with Crime No.252 of 2023 on the file of
the 2nd respondent Police and pending investigation.
2.The appellant is an accused in Crime No.252 of 2023 for offence
under Sections 294(b) of IPC r/w Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(1)(p) of
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act, 2015.
3.The gist of the case is that the appellant posted certain postings
deprecating a political party leader of the marginalized society in the
Facebook with an criminal intention to degrade the leader of the
marginalized community. Hence, the 3rd respondent lodged a complaint
along with the Facebook posting to the 2nd respondent and above said
case registered against the appellant, thereafter, he was arrested and
remanded to judicial custody.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant
not posted any abusive or derogative contents against the leader. The 3 rd
respondent due to some previous enmity lodged the complaint against the
appellant. The appellant is residing with his family in a rural area having
little exposure to the outer world and he is not conversant to post such
postings in the Facebook. He further submits the appellant will appear
before the 2nd respondent Police and cooperate with the investigation.
Hence, he prays for setting aside the impugned order and to grant bail.
5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondents 1 and 2 vehemently opposed the present bail application
stating that there are six previous cases against the appellant, two
Prohibition Offence cases, one case of Misappropriation, one for using
abusive language, one case for threatening with criminal intimidation and
one of case Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. He further submitted that
the appellant is an History Sheeter in H.S.No.1 of 2017. The appellant is
regularly indulging in criminal acts causing fear creating disharmony in
the area. The appellant claims himself to be a leader of a particular group
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and thereby, threatening everybody in the village and surroundings. The
release of the appellant would only further create law and order problem
in the village, hence, opposed the appeal.
6.Notice served to the 3rd respondent through Police who received
the same on 21.11.2023 and made acknowledgement. Despite printing
his name in the cause list, no representation for the 3 rd respondent either
in person or by any counsel.
7.Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is
seen that the appellant is in prison from 19.10.202. Though six previous
cases projected against him in all the cases he is on bail. This is the first
case of this nature. Now, the substantial part of the investigation
progressed. Now, a request has been made to Facebook to confirm the
postings made by the appellant and the IP details.
8.In view of the above, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
appellant subject to the following conditions.
(i)The appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(Rupees five thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the
satisfaction of the learned District and Sessions Judge,
Nagapattinam/Special Judge for SC/ST Act Cases.
(ii)the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb
Impression in the surety bond and the learned Judge may obtain a copy of
their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
(iii)the appellant shall appear before the 2nd respondent Police daily
at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, every Monday at
10.30 a.m., for a period of three months, thereafter as and when required
by the Police.
(iv)The appellant shall not give any inconvenience or trouble
knowingly or unknowingly to the 3rd respondent, failing which, the bail
shall be cancelled without any further reference.
(v)the appellant shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(vi)the appellant shall not abscond either during investigation or
trial;
(vii)the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either
during investigation or trial;
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(viii)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];
(ix)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered
under Section 229A IPC.
9.In view of the above, the impugned order in Crl.M.P.No.3383 of
2023, dated 03.11.2023 passed by the learned District and Sessions
Judge, Nagapattinam is set-aside and the Criminal Appeal is, accordingly,
allowed.
01.12.2023
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
vv2
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police,
Nagapattinam District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Keelaiyur Police Station,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Nagapattinam.
3.The Sub Jail,
Nagapattinam.
4.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
01.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
