Madras High Court
S.Murukesh vs Jayakumar @ Nanjil B E Jayakumar on 12 March, 2025
Author: B.Pugalendhi
Bench: B.Pugalendhi
Crl.A(MD)No.208 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :12.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
Crl.A(MD)No.208 of 2022
S.Murukesh ... Appellant
Vs
1.Jayakumar @ Nanjil B E Jayakumar
2.State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by the Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Nagercoil Through the Special Public Prosecutor,
Tirunelveli.
Crime No.1 of 2022 ... Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST (POA) Act,
2018, as against the order passed by the learned II Additional Sessions
Judge, Tirunelveli in Crl.MP No.57 of 2022, dated 09.02.2022.
For Appellant : No appearance
For R1 : Mr.R.J.Karthick
For R2 : Mr.A.S.Abdul Kalam Azad
Government Advocate
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
Crl.A(MD)No.208 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This appellant is a practising Advocate in Kanyakumari
District. He lodged a complaint before the second respondent police as
against the first respondent that he has cheated a sum of Rs.35 Lakhs.
The second respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.1 of
2022, on 10.01.2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 420
IPC, 3(1)(p), 3(1)(q) of the SC/ST(POA) Amendment Act 2015. The
first respondent was arrested by the second respondent Police on
31.01.2022. He moved an application for bail, before the II Additional
District and Sessions Court, Tirunelveli in Cr.MP No.57 of 2022. The
said application was taken on file on 02.02.2022 by the trial Court and
notice was ordered to the defacto complainant/the appellant herein, on
04.02.2022. However, the second respondent police has failed to serve
notice in a proper manner. They have communicated about this notice
only through WhatsApp on 08.02.2022. Since the defacto complainant
was not present on the date of hearing of bail application filed by the
first respondent, the trial Court has granted bail to him, considering the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
materials placed before it, by its order dated 09.02.2022. Challenging
the same, the appellant has filed this Criminal Appeal that the order
has been passed by the trial Court, without issuing any notice as
contemplated under Section 15A(3) and (5) of SC/ST(POA)
Amendment Act, 2015.
2.When this Criminal appeal was taken up for hearing on
03.03.2025, there was no representation for the appellant. Therefore,
this Court, by its order dated 03.03.2025, directed the respondent
police to inform the complainant/appellant about the listing of this
appeal for hearing before this Court.
3.The officer, namely Mr.Sivaraj, who is present before this
Court submits that he has informed the appellant about the listing of
this appeal through his mobile number 9092794884 on 08.03.2025 at
7.53 a.m and 11.03.2025 at 9.34 p.m. Even then, there is no
representation for the appellant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
4.The case of the appellant is that he is a practising Advocate,
belongs to Schedule caste community. The appellant and the first
respondent are known to each other. For purchase of a house property
from the first respondent, the appellant has given a sum of Rs.35
Lakhs to him on different occasions through NEFT. Later he came to
know that the first respondent is not having any intention to sell the
house property and he attempted to cheat him. Therefore, the appellant
demanded to repay the amount, which was given by him to the first
respondent, for which, the first respondent has issued cheques. When
the same was presented for collection by the appellant, it was
dishonoured stating “funds insufficient''. Therefore, the appellant has
lodged a criminal complainant before the second respondent police,
based on which, a case in Crime No.1 of 2022 was registered. The first
respondent was arrested by the respondent police and therefore, he has
approached the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruneveli,
seeking bail. The grievance of the appellant is that without issuing any
notice as contemplated under Section 15A(3) and (5) of SC/ST(POA)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
Amendment Act, 2015 to him, bail was granted to the first respondent
by the learned Judge. According to the appellant, since he was not
issued with any notice by the respondent police, he could not be
present before the trial Court, when the bail application was listed for
hearing. The bail application was entertained by the trial Court on
04.02.2022 and notice was ordered. The respondent police claims that
the notice was communicated to the appellant through whatsapp in the
afternoon of 08.02.2022 and bail was granted to the first respondent on
09.02.2022.
5.Admittedly, the appellant is a practising advocate.
However, he has failed to defend the application filed by the first
respondent in Cr.MP.No.57 of 2022, even though he has received a
notice on 08.02.2022. The trial Court has granted bail on 09.02.2022.
It is also reported that the trial has commenced by examining PW 1
and the case is posted to 07.03.2025 for cross examination of PW 1.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
6.Since the appellant has not made out any case, this Court is
not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court in
Cr.MP.No.57 of 2022, dated 09.02.2022. Accordingly this Criminal
Appeal is dismissed.
12.03.2025
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vrn
To
The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Nagercoil Through the Special Public Prosecutor,
Tirunelveli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
B.PUGALENDHI, J.,
vrn
Judgment made in
12.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2025 06:22:02 pm )
