Madras High Court

Veerapandi vs The Deputy Superintendent Of Police on 26 June, 2025

                                                                           Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                  DATE : 26.06.2025

                                                          CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

                                      Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

                Veerapandi
                                                            ... Appellant in Crl.A(MD) No.628 of 2025

                1. Vinith

                2. Vallarasu

                3. Mukesh

                4. Dhanabal

                5. Arun

                6. Sathiyamoorthy

                7. Priyadharsan

                8. Praveen

                9. Ramajeyam

                10. Manisankar

                11. Vigneshwaran

                12. Aravind

                13. Arjunan
                                                          ... Appellants in Crl.A(MD) No.629 of 2025

                1 / 11



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis               ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm )
                                                                        Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025



                1. Madhan

                2. Santhosh

                3. Selvakumar

                4. Sathish @ Sathiskumar

                5. Kalaivendhan

                6. Sathish @ Sathish Kumar

                7. Govindaraj
                                                       ... Appellants in Crl.A(MD) No.640 of 2025

                                                            Vs

                1. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,
                Alangudi, Pudukkottai, Alangudi,
                Pudukottai District.

                2. State of Tamilnadu Rep by
                Inspector of Police, Alangudi,
                Vadakadu Police Station,
                Alangudi Taluk,
                Pudukottai District.
                (Crime No. 52 of 2025).

                3. Manoj
                                                                              ... Respondents in all appeals
                Common Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of
                SC/ST (PoA) Act to set aside the orders, dated 30.05.2025 made in
                Cr.M.P.Nos.113, 114 and 115 of 2025 respectively, on the file of the learned
                Special Sessions Judge (FAC), Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases,
                Pudukottai and enlarge the appellants on bail.


                2 / 11



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis            ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm )
                                                                                Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

                                  For Appellants         : Mr.K.Balassundharam
                                                                   Senior Counsel for Mr.K.C.Maniyarasu

                                  For R1 & R2           : Mr.K.Gnanasekaran
                                                         Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

                                  For R3                : Mr.A.Raja

                                                   COMMON JUDGMENT

These Criminal Appeals have been filed challenging the orders

passed by the learned Special Sessions Judge (FAC), Special Court for Trial of

SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukottai made in Cr.M.P.Nos.112 to 114 of 2025, dated

30.05.2025.

2. The appellants are A1 to A21, who were arrested and remanded to

judicial custody for the past 52 days on the allegation that the appellants and

others have committed the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2),

118(1), 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 326(g), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 r/w 3(1)(r), 3(1)

(s), 3(2)(iii), 3(2)(iv) of SC/ST (PoA) Act 1989 r/w 3 of TNPPDL Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute between

the complainant parties and the accused pending before the District Munsif

cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Alangulam. On 05.05.2025, the accused

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm ) Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

persons came with deadly weapons at about 09.00 p.m., and A1 attacked the

defacto complainant/3rd respondent by kicking him while he was riding a bike

with two other persons. The other accused, who accompanied the first

accused had attacked them with knife and wooden rod and threatened them

that they should not be left alone and inflicted an injury over his neck. When

the defacto complainant and two others ran into their street, the accused party,

who belong to Muthiraiyar Community came together and created a riot with

the people belonging to the defacto complainant (Scheduled Caste

Community) and they burnt a hut and threatened them that they would do them

away.

4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants

submitted that it is a case and case in counter and the appellants have also

given a counter complaint against the 3rd respondent party and that is

registered in Cr.No.53 of 2025.

5. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent party, who are accused in

the counter case, have been released on bail on conditions and now the

conditions have also been relaxed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm ) Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

6.It is further submitted that the appellants are ready and willing to

furnish sureties and comply with the conditions imposed by the Court and that

the investigation is almost completed.

7.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the accused have committed serious

criminal acts, in which, 15 persons had suffered injuries and two persons

suffered grievous injuries and all were admitted in the hospital and discharged.

It is a communal riot between the 3rd respondent's community and the

appellants' community. In this regard, a counter case has also been registered.

The investigation reveals that due to unlawful act of the accused, 7 houses

were damaged, including one hut, which was completely burnt and vehicles

were also damaged and burnt. In view of that, penal sections were also altered

subsequently. It is further submitted that the police are carrying out police

picketing in order to curtail any untoward law and order issue.

8.A Public Interest Litigation petition is said to have been filed by a

third party in WP(MD) No.14236 of 2025 to arrest all the accused involved in

this case and to conduct proper investigation and award compensation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm ) Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

9.The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that though a

counter case has been registered against the 3rd respondent party, including this

case, three cases have been registered against the appellants. Moreover, in the

counter case, the 3rd respondent party have been released on bail. He further

submitted that there is a threat in the village. If the accused are released on

bail, they will intensify the communal issue. He further submitted that in the

occurrence, properties have been damaged and many persons were attacked.

10.As the learned trial Judge had observed that notice has not been

served on the 3rd respondent in compliance with Section 15A of SC/ST (PoA)

Act, 1989, these appeals ought to be remanded to the trial Judge to hear the 3rd

respondent and then to pass orders on the bail applications.

11.It is learnt from the orders of the learned trial Judge that the bail

applications have been dismissed in view of non-compliance of Section 15A

of SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989 and now the same is rectified by furnishing notice

to the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent has now appeared through counsel,

who has made his submission. So the mandate under Section 15A of SC/ST

(PoA) Act, 1989 has been complied in substance and opportunity for the 3rd

respondent to make his objection has also been given and availed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm ) Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

12.Having heard all sides exhaustively, it is not essential to remand

the matter back to the Special Court to consider the same issue of entitlement

of bail for the appellants.

13.The 3rd respondent apprehended that there is still threat in the

village and if the appellants are released on bail, it would cause law and order

issue. As per the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side),

police picketing is being carried out in order to curtail any law and order issue.

As per the direction given in WP(MD) No.14236 of 2025, compensation has

also been given to the tune of Rs.8 lakhs to the affected persons.

14.It is further learnt that all the injured persons have been

discharged from the hospital. The accused are in custody for nearly 52 days.

The 3rd respondent and others, who are arrayed as accused in the counter case

given by the appellants party have already been released on bail and the

conditions imposed on them have also been relaxed.

15.The origin of the occurrence is not any communal issue but a

pending civil dispute. Though the appellants belong to a different community,

they are not communal leaders.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm ) Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

16.Taking into consideration of all the submissions and situation, I

feel that the appellants can be released on bail, provided, some stringent

conditions are imposed. Since tension is said to be prevailing in the village,

even if the appellants are released on bail, they should be imposed with a

condition to stay somewhere away from the local place where the occurrence

had taken place.

17. Accordingly, these Criminal Appeals are allowed by setting aside

the orders, dated 30.05.2025 in Cr.M.P.Nos.113, 114 and 115 of 2025 on the

file of the learned Special Sessions Judge (FAC), Special Court for Trial of

SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukottai. The appellants are ordered to be released on

bail on them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five

Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction

of the learned Special Sessions Judge (FAC), Special Court for Trial of

SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukottai, and on further conditions that:

[a]the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Sessions Judge may obtain a copy of their valid identity card to ensure their identity.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm ) Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

[b]the appellants shall stay at Coimbatore District and appear and sign before the Peelamedu Police Station daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders.

[c]the appellants shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial and they shall not involve in similar type of offences during the bail period.

                                            [d]the    appellants          shall      co-operate     with     the
                                  investigation.

[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Sessions Judge/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellants in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellants 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.





                                                                                                   26.06.2025
                NCC      : Yes/No
                Index    : Yes/No
                Internet : Yes/No
                PNM








https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                      ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 04:21:17 pm )
                                                                          Crl. A.(MD)Nos. 628, 629 and 640 of 2025

                To

                1.The Special Sessions Judge (FAC),