Madras High Court
Prasanth vs The Deputy Superintendent Of Police on 5 March, 2025
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
Crl.A.No.244 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Criminal Appeal No.244 of 2025
1. Prasanth
2. Vimal ... Appellants
..vs..
1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Villupuram Range, Villupuram.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Villupuram Taluk Police Station,
Villupuram,
Crime No.37 of 2025.
3. Sarath Kumar ... Respondents
Criminal Appeal filed under Sections 14-A of SC/ST Act, 1989,
to set aside the order dated 31.01.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.22 of 2025
on the file of the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of
Cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Villupuram.
Page No.1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
Crl.A.No.244 of 2025
For Appellants : Ms.M.Janani
For Respondents : Ms.G.V.Kasthuri
Additional Public Prosecutor
for R1 and R2
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the order
order dated 31.01.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.22 of 2025 on the file of
the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Villupuram.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the version of the de-facto
complainant is that he had good relationship with one Balaji and Ayyanar
and they had quarrel with the accused persons and having previous
enmity with each other, and due to the said quarrel, on 16.01.2025 at 5.30
p.m., when the de-facto complainant was standing in front of Udhya
Water Wash shop at KK Road along with his two wheeler, the accused
persons came there and abused and scolded him in filthy language by
using their caste name and also assaulted him with stones and also
threatened him. When the de-facto complainant was trying to escape
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
from there, the other accused persons chased him and he had taken
shelter in the said Ayyannar's house and his bike was broken by the
accused persons. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant and his friends, i.e.
said Balaji and Ayyannar were sitting in the Mani Nagar bridge, the
accused persons came there and threatened them with knife and chased
them in different directions. The said Ayyanar had gone into his house,
they have thrown stones on his house and broken the glass. Further, on
seeing the father of the de-facto complainant, the accused persons abused
him by using the caste name and threatened him with knife and also
assaulted him. Hence, the case in Crime No.37 of 2025 was registered
against the appellants herein/accused persons for the offences under
Sections 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 3 of the Tamil
Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 and
Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b) and 351(3) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and they were arrested and remanded to
judicial custody on 19.01.2025. Therefore, the appellants have filed a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
petition under Section 483 of BNSS seeking for grant of bail. The
learned Special Judge, after hearing the objections on the respondent's
side and also considering the gravity of offences, dismissed the said
petition. The said order is challenged in the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants
are innocent persons and a false case had been foisted against them. The
appellants will neither abscond, nor tamper with any witnesses, if bail is
granted. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the appellants and that they
would abide by stringent conditions, if any, that may be imposed on
them.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-Police submitted that the offences committed by the
appellants are serious in nature. The accused persons are habitual
offenders and they have also got previous cases and they are detained
under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. She further submitted that
investigation is not yet completed and if the appellants are enlarged on
bail, there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and may hamper the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
investigation, and hence, she strongly objects to grant bail to the
appellants.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and
also perused the materials available on record.
6. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that the Court below, after
considering the entire materials, had rightly dismissed the petition
seeking bail. Therefore, this Court does not find any change of
circumstances and there is also no reason to interfere with the order
passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial
of Cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Villupuram.
Hence, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
05.03.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
ms
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
To
1.The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases
under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
Villupuram.
2. The Officer in-charge,
District Jail, Villupuram.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Villupuram Range,
Villupuram.
5. The Inspector of Police,
Villupuram Taluk Police Station,
Villupuram,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
ms
05.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2025 05:49:26 pm )
