Madras High Court
Selvam vs State Through on 28 November, 2023
Crl.A.(MD).No.861 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 30.10.2023
Pronounced on : 28.11.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI
Crl.A.(MD).No.861 of 2023
1.Selvam
2.Panjavarnam ... Appellants/Accused Nos.2 & 3
Vs.
1.State through
The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Thirupparankundram,
Madurai City.
2.State through
The Inspector of Police,
Thirupparankundram Police Station,
Madurai City. ...1st & 2nd Respondents/Complainants
3.Selvam ...3rd Respondent/De-facto
Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of SC/ST Act, 1989,
to call for entire records pertaining to the order dated 07.09.2023 made in
Crl.M.P.No.2760 of 2023 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions
Judge (PCR), Madurai and enlarge the appellants on bail.
Page 1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.861 of 2023
For Appellants : Mr.B.Muneeswaran
For R1 & R2 : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R3 : Mr.R.Alagumani
JUDGMENT
The appellants have filed this Criminal Appeal to set aside the order
dated 07.09.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.2760 of 2023 on the file of the
III Additional District and Sessions Court (PCR), Madurai and to enlarge the
appellants on bail by allowing this appeal.
2.The brief facts of the prosecution case:
The appellants are arrayed as Accused Nos.2 and 3 in this case.
Accused Nos.1 and 4 are their sons. Accused Nos.1 to 4 belonged to
Piramalaikallar Community. The deceased Ramya belonged to Scheduled
Community. Accused No.1 and the deceased worked at the same private
hospital and they developed love affairs. As Accused No.1 and deceased were
majors they married against the words of Accused Nos.2 to 4 and they lived
separately. During their separate living whenever wordy quarrel arose,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Accused No.1 used to scold the deceased by saying her caste. The deceased
became pregnant, which was disliked by Accused No.2 to 4 and the accused
started torture. Hence, the deceased attempted to suicide. Thereafter, Accused
No.1 got back the deceased stating that he would take care of her. However, at
the instigation of Accused Nos.2 to 4 and their abetment, on the occurrence day
Accused No.1 attacked the deceased with rammer (Thimsu Kattai)
indiscriminately and caused the murder of the deceased. Hence, the case was
registered against the Accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.224 of 2023 by
respondent police for the offence under Sections 302 of IPC r/w 3(2)(v) of
SC/ST Act. The respondent police did investigation and laid a charge sheet
against the accused and the same was taken on cognizance in Spl.S.C.No.64 of
2023 by the Trial Court. The appellants who are Accused Nos.2 and 3 filed the
second petition in Crl.M.P.No.2760 of 2023 for bail before the Trial Court and
the same was dismissed as per order dated 07.09.2023.
3.Aggrieved by the dismissal of the bail petition, the appellants have
preferred the present Criminal Appeal before this Court.
4. Heard both sides and perused the records in this Criminal Appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the
appellants are arrayed as Accused Nos.2 and 3. Accused No.1 is their son, who
married a girl of different caste, so their son was excommunicated and left
from their family. The appellants did not know anything about the happenings
between Accused No.1 and the deceased family. Already the appellants moved
bail and the same was dismissed by the Trial Court as well as by this Court.
The appellants filed the second bail petition in Crl.M.P.No.2760 of 2023 before
the Trial Court and it was dismissed on 07.09.2023. The appellants are in
judicial custody for more than 128 days and a charge sheet was filed and the
same was taken on file as Spl.S.C.No.64 of 2023 by the Trial Court. So there
is no possibility of tampering witnesses. But, the Trial Court dismissed the bail
believing the version of threat made by the defcato complainant and also the
fact that the bail moved by the appellants was dismissed by this Court.
Because of earlier dismissal by this Court, the same cannot be revisited by
another Criminal Appeal and every time the accused can approach the Court
for bail. In support of his argument, the counsel for the appellants relied on the
judgment passed by the Allahabad High Court in Crl.Appeal No.9226 of
2022 dated 25.05.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondents 1 and 2 strongly opposed to grant bail to the appellants stating that
the investigation was completed, which revealed the involvement of the
appellants in the crime and laid charge sheet. There is no change in
circumstances. The trial Court has correctly passed the impugned order.
7. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that at the
time of marriage between the Accused No.1 and his daughter, he condemned as
it would not safe for them who belonged to Scheduled caste. Under false
promise, Accused No.1 married the deceased. After marriage, the accused
tortured, so the deceased consumed poison. The deceased was admitted in the
hospital, where her parents visited. The deceased told them that she was
pregnant and the accused hurled abusive words by stating her caste name, so
after recovery, the defacto complainant took her back to their home. Then,
Accused No.1 again took her back with assurance. But the accused committed
brutal murder of the deceased, as honor killing. The charge was laid and the
case was taken on file. The appellants would not take advantage as charge
sheet filed, still the appellants have opportunity to tamper and hamper the
evidence and therefore prays direction for speedy trial. Further, once earlier
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
bail was negative, the second one would amount to review its earlier order, so
the Court becomes functus officio in entertaining the second bail. The learned
counsel relied on the judgement reported in (2001) 1 Supreme Court Cases,
169 and the judgment in Crl.Appeal No.1797 of 2022 dated 12.04.2023
passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh.
8. On hearing both side rival arguments and on perusal of records, it is
clear that the deceased belonged to scheduled caste and Accused belonged to
other caste. It is also clear that at the time of marriage the appellants
condemned and also the defacto complainant thought it would not safe to her
daughter. It is also clear that in an earlier occasion the deceased attempted to
suicide as the accused alleged to have tortured by using caste name. Accused
No.1 took her with assurance of taking care. However, the occurrence took
place at the hometown of the accused, that too in the house of the Accused No.
1. The appellants alleged to have abetted Accused No.1 for commission of
crime upon deceased and after investigation charge sheet was laid and they are
facing trial. Mere filing charge sheet, it would not mean that the accused are
entitled to right of bail. Each and every case is to be looked into with gravity
of alleged offence. In this case a pregnant woman belonged to scheduled caste
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
was murdered brutally as seen from photos filed along with counter. The
defecto complainant stated it is honor killing, which is denied by the
appellants. When charge sheet is filed these facts would be decided only after
adducing evidence. At this stage, though the appellants are in custody for more
than 120 days, considering the alleged nature of brutal murder and heinous
nature of crime, this Court is not inclined to grant bail.
9. In the result, this Criminal appeal stands dismissed.
28.11.2023
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
vsd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The III Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR),
Madurai.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Thirupparankundram,
Madurai City.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Thirupparankundram Police Station,
Madurai City.
4.The Central Prison, Madurai.
5.The Women Central Prison, Madurai.
6.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
7.The Section Officer,
Criminal Section (Records),
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.VADAMALAI, J.
VSD
Pre - Delivery Order made in
28.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
