Madras High Court
Siva Chidambaram vs The Deputy Superintendent Of Police on 28 July, 2025
Crl.A.(MD)No.769 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 28.07.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
Crl.A.(MD)No.769 of 2025
Siva Chidambaram ... Appellant / Accused
vs.
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvidaimarudhur,
Thanjavur District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Natchiyarkovil Police Station,
Thanjavur District.
Crime No.240 of 2025 ... Respondents 1 and
2 /Complainants
3.Velumani ... 3rd Respondent/ Defacto
Complainant
Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14 A(2) of Scheduled Caste/
Scheduled Tribes, to call for the records pertaining to the order dated
14.07.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.524 of 2025 on the file of the I Additional
District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur and to set aside the same and
enlarge the appellant in connection with Crime No.240 of 2025 on the file
of the second respondent police by allowing this criminal appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Anand
for Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
Crl.A.(MD)No.769 of 2025
For Respondents 1 and 2
: Mr.K.Gnanasekaran
Government Advocate (crl.side)
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order made in
Crl.M.P.No.524 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025 on the file of the learned I
Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur and enlarge the
appellant/Sole Accused on bail in Crime No.240 of 2025 on the file of the
second respondent police.
2. According to the prosecution, the appellant is said to have
committed the offences under Sections 296(b) and 105 of BNS r/w Section
3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act @ to Section 296(b), 103(1) of BNS r/w 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r) and
3(1)(s) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under :-
(i) The defacto complainant, Velumani, is the cousin of the deceased,
Packiaraj, and both belonged to Hindu Adhi Dravidar Community. The
deceased, Packiaraj, was residing and working in the shops situated at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
Nachiarkovil and he used to drink alcohol. After drinking, he starts little
arguments with the passersby. When that being so, on 18.06.2025, at about
08.00 pm., the defacto complainant received a phone call from one
Nandakumar, who informed him that his cousin, Packiaraj, in an intoxicated
state was standing opposite to Chitra provisional stores, opposite to the auto
stand at Nachiar kovil North Street and unfurling abusive and filthy
language and the appellant, who was running Ganapathy Finance behind the
Anna statue had abused the deceased and attacked him on his head using
wooden rafter and that resulted in the death of Packiaraj.
(ii) Based on the complaint given by the third respondent, an FIR was
registered, and the same is now under investigation. Therefore, the appellant
has filed a petition for bail in Cr.M.P.No.524 of 2025, before the learned I
Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur, and the same was
dismissed on 14.07.2025. Challenging the same, the appellant has preferred
this Criminal Appeal.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the
appellant has no prior criminal antecedents and had no motive against the
deceased. It is further contended that, even if the prosecution’s case is
accepted at its face value, the appellant might have been provoked by the
indecent behavior exhibited by the deceased in front of the appellant’s shop.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
5. Even in the complaint, the complainant himself has stated that he
received a phone call informing him that the deceased in an intoxicated state
was standing opposite to a provisional store in a busy area and unfurling
abusive and filthy language. Even if it is presumed that the appellant
attacked the deceased, the circumstance reveals the act could not have been
the outcome of on pre-mediation as alleged by the prosecution
6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there were
women staff members working in his finance company, the deceased was
behaving indecently and the appellant only reprimanded the deceased to
leave the place.
7. It is further submitted that except for the allegation that the
deceased belonged to the SC/ST community, there is nothing in the
complaint to suggest that the occurrence took place solely because the
deceased belonged to a particular community or that the act was committed
with the intention to insult or humiliate him on the basis of his caste.
8. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the
State would submit that if the appellant is ordered to be released on bail,
stringent conditions may be imposed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
9. The circumstances stated in the complaint and the manner in which
the occurrence is said to have taken place reveal that the deceased
conducted himself in an objectionable manner in public view, which had
caused annoyance and threat to the people around. Although the
investigation is still pending, releasing the appellant on bail will not
prejudice the investigation. A major part of the investigation has already
been completed. The accused is said to be having permanent residence.
Considering the overall circumstances surrounding the occurrence, I feel
that the appellant/sole accused can be released on bail with certain
conditions:
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order dated
14.07.2025 passed in Cr.M.P.No.524 of 2025 on the file of the learned I
Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur, 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 I Additional District and
Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur , and on further conditions that:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb
Impression in the surety bond and the learned I Additional District and
Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur, may obtain a copy of their valid identity
card to ensure their identity.
(b) the appellant shall appear and sign before the Inspector of Police,
Natchiyarkovil Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.
(c) the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witnesses, 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
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 269 of BNS.
28.07.2025
Index : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No.
Rmk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
To
1. I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Keerathurai Police Station,
Madurai District.1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvidaimarudhur,
Thanjavur District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Natchiyarkovil Police Station,
Thanjavur District.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
5.The Superintendent,
District Jail, Padukkkottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
DR.R.N.MANJULA, J.,
Rmk
28.07.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/07/2025 07:57:54 pm )
