Madras High Court
Mari @ Marisamy vs The State Represented By on 14 September, 2023
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 04.10.2023
Pronounced on : 09.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
Mari @ Marisamy ... Appellant / Accused No.1
Vs.
1.The State represented by
The Assistant Superintendent of Police,
Aruppukottai Sub Division,
Virudhunagar District. ...1st Respondent/Investigating
Officer
2.State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Kariapatti Police Station,
Virudhunagar District.
(In Crime No.141 of 2023) ...2nd Respondent/Complainant
3.M.Ramamoorthi ...3rd Respondent/De-facto
Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015 as amended by Act 1 of 2016, to call for
the records pertaining to the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.3051 of 2023 on the
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
file of the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act
cases, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, dated 14.09.2023 and set
aside the same and enlarge the appellant on bail by allowing this criminal
appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj
For R1 & R2 : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R3 : Mr.P.Satheskumar
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed to set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.
3051 of 2023, dated 14.09.2023 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act cases, Virudhunagar District at
Srivilliputhur and enlarge the appellant on bail in connection with Crime
No.141 of 2023 on the file of the second respondent police.
2.According to the prosecution the appellant and other accused
said to have committed the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148,
294(b), 323, 324, 506(2), 302 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of
SC/ST (POA) Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
3.The case of the prosecution is that on 27.06.2023 at about 10.00
p.m., when the de-facto complainant's father namely Mayakrishnan was
sitting in front of his house and was having food, at that time 10 persons,
who belonged to Thevar Community came there and asked him in the
following manner 'vt;tsT jpkpUe;jh ehq;fs; tUk;NghJ cl;fhh;e;J
nfhz;bUg;g” and the accused Shanmuganathan @ Sathasivam kicked the
de-facto complainant's father and assaulted on his head with wooden log
and the appellants and other accused persons said to have attacked the
de-facto complainant's father and also threatened him with dire
consequences. Due to that the de-facto complainant's father had crush
injuries on his head and was died on 30.06.2023. Hence, the de-facto
complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police and F.I.R was
registered in Crime No.141 of 2023 against the appellant and other accused
persons for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(2),
302 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
4.The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the case
of the prosecution is entirely false and the case is a foisted one against the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
appellant and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the
prosecution. He would further submit that the deceased was convicted
earlier and sentenced for murdering his wife and he was in prison for
12 years and subsequently coming out from the prison and involved in
sexually harassing the village ladies, in which, he misbehaved with one lady
Vasuki. He would further submit that the appellant was arrested and
remanded to judicial custody on 01.07.2023 and he is in judicial custody for
more than 95 days and the respondent police has completed the
investigation and filed charge sheet before the Special Court for Trial of
SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputhur. He would further submit that the
appellant is willing to produce sufficient sureties for the appearance and the
appellant will never abscond and will not tamper the witnesses and hence he
seeks to grant bail to the appellant.
5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first
and second respondents would submit that totally there are seven accused in
this case and investigation has been completed and final report has also
been filed under Sections 147, 148, 149, 114, 294(b), 323, 302, 506(2) of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act
before the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputhur
by deleting one of the accused namely Sathish and final report has yet to be
taken on file. He would further submit that due to this occurrence tension
prevailed in the said village and this appellant attacked the deceased with
wooden log on his head, which resulted the death of deceased and he raised
strong objection and prayed to dismiss this appeal.
6.The learned counsel for the third respondent/de-facto
complainant would submit that only 15 families belonged to the de-facto
complainant are residing in the said village and more than 150 families of
accused's community are residing in the said village and if the accused
person is released on bail, he will threaten the witnesses and also tamper the
evidence. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
7.On perusal of records it is seen that the appellant herein is
arrayed as main accused. The specific overt act as against the appellant is
that he attacked the deceased with wooden log on his head, therefore the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
deceased sustained head injuries and died. If bail is granted to the appellant
he may tamper the witness and hamper the trial.
8.Considering the above facts and circumstances and considering
the specific overt act against the appellant and gravity of the offence alleged
against the appellant and also considering the strong objection raised by the
prosecution, this Court is not inclined to allow this appeal and to grant bail
to the appellant at this stage.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal stands dismissed.
09.10.2023
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
vsd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
To
1.The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act cases,
Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.
2.The Assistant Superintendent of Police,
Aruppukottai Sub Division,
Virudhunagar District. .
3.The Inspector of Police,
Kariapatti Police Station,
Virudhunagar District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
5.The Section Officer,
Criminal Section (Records),
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
P.VADAMALAI, J.
vsd
Pre - Delivery Order made in
Crl.A.(MD).No.893 of 2023
09.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
