Madras High Court
Rangarajan vs Jaganathan on 24 April, 2025
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
Crl.A.No.269 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Criminal Appeal No.269 of 2025
Rangarajan ... Appellant
..vs..
1. Jaganathan
2. The State Rep.by
Inspector of Police,
Nallur Police Station,
Nallur, Tiruppur District,
Crime No.89 of 2025. ... Respondents
Criminal Appeal filed under Sections 14A(2) of SC/ST Act, to set
aside the order dated 07.02.2025 made in C.M.P.No.19 of 2025 on the
file of the Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (PoA), Tiruppur
by allowing this Criminal appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Prabakar
For Respondents : No appearance for R1
Mrs.G.V.Kasthuri
Additional Public Prosecutor for R2
Page No.1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 01:33:21 pm )
Crl.A.No.269 of 2025
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal is preferred against the order dated
07.02.2025 made in C.M.P.No.19 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court
for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (PoA), Tiruppur.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant/de-facto complainant
submitted that the first respondent-A2, who is the local rowdy element
and also a history sheeter, trespassed into the property of the appellant
and damaged fencing and stolen goods worth about Rs.5,00,000/- and
threatened the appellant and also abused him by using the caste name.
Hence, the appellant lodged a complaint against the first respondent and
others in Crime No.89 of 2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 329(3) and 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Sections 3, 3(1)(g) and 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and they were arrested on
31.01.2025. He further submitted that the first respondent, who is the
habitual offender, had filed a petition invoking Section 483 Bharatiya
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 01:33:21 pm )
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in Crl.M.P.No.19 of 2025 before the
Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (PoA) Act, Tiruppur
seeking bail. The Special Judge failed to consider the threat given by the
first respondent-A2, who is a notorious rowdy element, to the
appellant/de-facto complainant, vide order dated 07.02.2025 allowed the
petition and granted bail to the first respondent holding that the dispute
between the parties is civil in nature. Therefore, the bail granted by the
Court below is liable to be set aside.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the second
respondent-Police, on instructions, submitted that, when the de-facto
complainant was out of station and taking advantage of his absence, the
first respondent-A2, who is a history sheeter, trespassed into the property
of the appellant and removed fence and also damaged the property. She
further submitted that there are seven previous cases pending against the
first respondent-A2. Further, after completion of the investigation, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 01:33:21 pm )
respondent-Police filed a charge-sheet before the Special Court for Trial
of Cases under SC/ST (PoA) Act, Tiruppur in Spl.S.C.No.11 of 2025.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the second respondent and
perused the materials available on record.
5. There is no representation for the first respondent.
6. On a reading of the entire materials, particularly, the F.I.R. and
grounds of appeal, and also considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the appellant and the second respondent-Police, this
Court finds that the first respondent-A2 is a history sheeter and there are
seven previous cases pending against him and the charges levelled
against him in the present case, are serious in nature. If the first
respondent-A2 is released on bail, there is every possibility of tampering
the witnesses and trial would get protracted. Therefore, the bail granted
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 01:33:21 pm )
in Crl.M.P.No.19 of 2025 dated 07.02.2025 by the Special Court for
Trial of Cases under SC/ST (PoA) Act, Tiruppur, is hereby set aside and
the second respondent-Police is directed to execute the warrant against
the first respondent-A2. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the case
in Spl.S.C.No.11 of 2025, on merits and in accordance with law, within a
period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
7. With the above observations and directions, this Criminal
Appeal is disposed of.
24.04.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
ms
To
1. The Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (PoA),
Tiruppur.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Nallur Police Station,
Nallur, Tiruppur District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 01:33:21 pm )
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
ms
24.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 01:33:21 pm )
