B.Ramesh v. The District Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR 1.B.Ramesh 2.R. Amasaveni 3.E. Rajesh 4.R. Bharath ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The District Superintendent of Police Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District.
2.The State Rep by its The Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai.
3.R. Alex ..Respondent(s) To direct the Learned Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial Case of SC/ST (POA) Act, Tiruvannamalai to consider the bail application of the petitioners on the same day of their surrender in crime No.60 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police and pass such further or other orders as it may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.P.Jayachandran For Respondent(s):
Mr.A.Amarnath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side), For R1 And R2
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial Case of SC/ST (POA) Act, Tiruvannamalai, to consider the petitioners' bail application sympathetically and pass orders on merits on the same day of their surrender, in connection with Cr.No.60 of 2026, pending on the file of the respondent police.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents 1 and 2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant was returning home on his motorcycle after work on 28.05.2026. At that time, a tourist van, driven by the first petitioner, came in a rash and negligent manner. The de facto complainant fearing for his safety, move to the side of the road, whereupon he slipped and his motorcycle was damaged. The de facto complainant questioned the first petitioner regarding his rash driving. The first petitioner took away the mobile phone of the de facto complainant. Subsequently, at about 9.30 p.m. the de facto complainant accompanied by his uncle, went to the residence of the first petitioner and questioned him about his behaviour. The first petitioner got agitated and assaulted the de facto complainant with an iron rod and also abused him by referring to his caste. The wife of the first petitioner along with two neighbours, who are arrayed as
petitioners 2 to 4, also joined together, abused and assaulted the de facto complainant. Upon a crowd gathered at the scene, they left the de facto complainant.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case.
5. In view of the above factual position, there shall be a direction to the Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial Case of SC/ST (POA) Act, Tiruvannamalai to consider the petitioners' bail application, preferably on the same day of their surrender, in connection with Crime No.60 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity to the victims under Section 15-A of the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989. The petitioners shall surrender before the jurisdictional Court concerned within a period of fifteen days from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order.
6. The Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 12-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order PVS
To 1.The Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial Case of SC/ST (POA) Act, Tiruvannamalai 2.The District Superintendent of Police Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
PVS 12-06-2026