Madras High CourtCRL A/96/2019dismissed

Ragu @ Sridhar v. State Rep.By

2019-02-13Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 13.02.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.A.No.96 of 2019

1. Ragu @ Sridhar

2. Ranjith ... Appellants vs.

The State rep. by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, OCU, Salem City, I/C CBCID, Salem Range.

... Respondent The Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1988, to set aside the order dated 13.11.2018 in C.M.P.No.1467 of 2018 in SC. No.78 of 2016, passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal and enlarge the appellants on bail.

For Appellants : Mr.S.P.Chockalingam For respondent : Mr.R.Ravichandran, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

JUDGMENT

The above criminal appeal has been filed against the order of dismissal of petition seeking bail filed by the appellants in C.M.P.No.1467 of 2018 made by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal, dated 13.11.2018.

2. The respondent police registered a case in Cr.No.2 of 2015 against the appellants and other accused for the offence punishable under Sections 120(b), 364, 34 read with 109, 384, 465, 471 read with 468, 302, 201, 212, 216 IPC read with 3(2)(V) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. Pending investigation, the appellants moved the petition for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal, in C.M.P.No.1467 of 2018 in Cr.No.2 of 2015. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, after hearing both the parties, by order dated 13.11.2018 had dismissed the petition seeking bail, by observing that the trial proceedings is going on and it will be completed very soon. If the appellants are released on bail, they would stall the trial proceedings.

Aggrieved against the dismissal of bail petition, the appellants are before this Court with the present criminal appeal, seeking bail.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the proceeding under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is special one, before an exclusive Court and as such the Court cannot invoke the powers under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. to cancel the bail. The appellants are an educated persons coming from a respectable family and the appellants are brothers. The appellants are the sole bread winner of their family and the family members are suffering a lot for their livelihood in the absence of the appellants. The appellants are in judicial custody since 07.06.2018 and a false case has been foisted against them. Therefore, the appellants are entitled for bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the trial is going on and till now 35 witnesses have been examined and most of the material witnesses have been examined and the remaining witnesses yet to be examined and the trial would be completed within a short period and now if the appellants are released on bail, they may tamper the witnesses. Hence, the learned counsel prays to dismiss the appeal.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. It is seen that the appellants were charged for the offence under Sections 120(b), 364, 34 read with 109, 384, 465, 471 read with 468, 302, 201, 212, 216 IPC read with 3(2)(V) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the bail petition filed by the appellants stating that the trial is going on and it would be completed very soon. If the appellants are released on bail, they would stall the trial proceedings. Hence, this Court does not find any perversity in the above said conclusion. Under these circumstance, the appellants could not be released on bail.

7. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the appeal filed against the order of dismissal of bail petition. This Court finds no merit and substance in the present criminal appeal.

8. In the result, the criminal appeal is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

rli To

1. The Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, OCU, Salem City, I/C CBCID, Salem Range.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. +1cc to Mr.S.P.Chockalingam, Advocate SR.12568 Crl.A.No.96 of 2019 VD(CO) CB(22/01/2020)