Subash v. State Rep.By Its, The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Subash ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by its, 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Omalur, Salem District.

2.State Rep.by, its, The Inspector of Police, Omalur Police Station, Salem District.

Cr.No.58 of 2026.

3.Thangaponnu ..Respondent(s) To direct the learned Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Salem District to consider the bail application filed by the petitioner on his surrender in connection with Cr.No.58 of 2026 on the file of the 2nd Respondent Police.

For Petitioner(s):

M/s.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Amarnath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side), For R1 & R2

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the learned Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Salem District, to consider the bail application to be filed by the petitioner upon his

surrender in connection with Cr.No.58 of 2026 on the file of the second Respondent Police.

2. A perusal of the complaint reveals that the victim, a woman, had been given 1,300 sq.ft. of land at Omalur Taluk, Salem District by her parents. She had put up a thatched shed and fenced the said property. It is alleged that one Mani, Subash and others compelled her to sell the property to them on their terms. When she refused, they created forged documents and she lodged a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, which is pending. In the above circumstances, it is alleged that on 31.01.2026, the petitioner and other accused came in four vehicles, namely, Omni Car bearing Registration No.TN39 R 6890, Mahindra XUV Car bearing Registration No.TN 7779, Mahindra Scorpio Car bearing Registration No.TN 30 CH 1978 and Volkswagen Car bearing Registration No.TN 78 Y 5959, threatened, abused and assaulted the victim. They also demolished the thatched shed, removed the fencing and caused damaged to the property to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the investigation has been completed and a final report was filed before the jurisdictional Court on 19.05.2026. He fairly submitted that the four vehicles allegedly used in the commission of the offence, as referred to in the FIR, were not seized during the course of investigation.

4. Having considered the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court is not satisfied with the manner in which the investigation has been conducted. It appears that the final report has been filed in undue haste, without completing essential aspects of the investigation, thereby enabling the accused to seek bail on the ground that the charge sheet has already been filed. Such a practice cannot be countenanced and is strongly deprecated.

5. In view of the above, the Superintendent of Police, Salem District, is directed to conduct an enquiry into the manner in which the investigation has been carried out in the present case and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

12-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order PVS

To 1.The Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Salem District 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Omalur, Salem District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Omalur Police Station, Salem District.

Cr.No.58 of 2026.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

PVS 12-06-2026