Madras High Court
Ramkumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 26 March, 2025
Author: B.Pugalendhi
Bench: B.Pugalendhi
Crl.A.(MD)No.354 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
Crl.A.(MD)No.354 of 2025
Ramkumar ... Appellant
versus
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Contonment Range,
Trichy.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Cantonment L&O Police Station,
Tiruchirappalli.
3. K.Nagaraj ... Respondents
Appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Schedule Castes and
Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, as amended by Act 1
of 2016, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.
873 of 2025 on the file of the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions
Judge (PCR), Trichy dated 05.03.2025 and set aside the same as illegal and
enlarge the appellant on bail by allowing the appeal.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2025 07:48:46 pm )
Crl.A.(MD)No.354 of 2025
For Appellant : Mr.K.Sivabalan,
for M/s.Aran Legal Consultancy
For R1 and R2 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalam Azad,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For R3 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
The appellant/A6 was arrested on 15.01.2025 in connection with the
case in Crime No.39 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police for the
offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 296(b), 103(1), 351(3) of
BNS Act 2023 r/w. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015.
He moved a bail petition before the I Additional District and Sessions Court
(PCR), Trichy, in Crl.M.P.No.873 of 2025. But, the said petition was
dismissed by the trial Court, by its order dated 05.03.2025. Challenging the
same, the appellant has filed this appeal.
2. This Court, on 20.03.2025, ordered notice to the defacto
complainant. The defacto complainant was also served and his name has
also been printed in the cause list. However, there is no representation for
the defacto complainant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2025 07:48:46 pm )
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the
appellant is a friend of A1 and there was a motive between the deceased and
A1. He further submits that the deceased was an employee of A1 and he
was not paid with wages. When A1 was consuming liquor in a TASMAC
shop, the deceased questioned him that without paying his wages, he is
taking liquor along with his friends. Enraged over the same, all the accused
persons are said to have assaulted the deceased with hands. The appellant is
said to have pushed the deceased down and also kicked him. The deceased
also succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, this case was registered.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the
accused persons have also used an iron rod to assault the deceased.
However, the overt act attributed against the appellant is that he has pushed
the deceased down and also kicked him along with other accused.
5. This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the
materials placed on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2025 07:48:46 pm )
6. The appellant is the 6th accused. Even according to the
prosecution, while he was consuming liquor along with A1, the deceased
picked up quarrel with A1. All accused persons, who were in an inebricated
condition, assaulted the deceased. The appellant is said to have assaulted
the deceased with hands and also kicked him. Though the appellant is in
jail for the past 70 days, the investigation has not been concluded sofar.
According to the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), a material
portion of investigation is completed and CCTV footage, which has been
recovered from the scene of occurrence, has to be certified by the Forensic
Department.
7. Considering the period of incarceration and the overt act attributed
as agianst the appellant and the stage of investigaiton, this Court is inclined
to allow this appeal.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order dated
05.03.2025, passed in Crl.M.P.No.873 of 2025, by the learned 1 st Additional
District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Trichy, is hereby set aside. The
appellant is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2025 07:48:46 pm )
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a
like sum to the satisfaction of the learned First Additional District and
Sessions Judge (PCR), Tiruchirappalli and on further condition that:
i) The appellant and the sureties shall submit a copy of
their Aadhaar Card or any other identity card issued by the
government in proof of their residence address;
ii) The appellant shall appear before the respondent
Police daily twice, i.e. at morning between 10.30 a.m. and
12.00 noon and at evening between 5.00 p.m. and 7.00 p.m.
He has to co-operate for the investigation.
iii) The appellant shall not misuse the liberty granted
to him by indulging in any further offence and shall not
tamper with the prosecution witnesses. He shall be available
for the trial as well.
iv) On violation of any of the above conditions by the
appellant, the respondent police shall move an application
for cancellation of the bail.
26.03.2025
ogy
NCC : Yes / No.
Index : Yes / No.
Internet : Yes / No.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2025 07:48:46 pm )
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy
To
1. The I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR),
Tiruchirappalli.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Contonment Range,
Trichy.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Cantonment L&O Police Station,
Tiruchirappalli.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
26.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2025 07:48:46 pm )
