Shanmugam v. The State Rep By, The Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-08-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN SHANMUGAM S/o.Perumal.

Appellant(s) Vs

1. The State Rep by, The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Hosur.

Crime.No.71/2025.

3.Nathiya D/o.Vijayan Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, to set aside the order dated 29.07.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.2047/2025, on the file of the learned Principal Session Judge, Krishnagiri and thereby allow the present Criminal Appeal by enlarging the appellant on bail in Crime No.71 of 2025, on the file of the second respondent pending investigation.

For Appellant(s):

Mr.C. Santhosh Kumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2 For R3 - Notice served, No appearance

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been preferred as against the dismissal of the order dated 29.07.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.2047 of 2025, on the file of the learned Principal Session Judge, Krishnagiri. 2.The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.07.2025 in pursuance of the registration of FIR in Crime No.71 of 2025 for the alleged offences under Section 294 (b), 323, 417, 506(i), 376 (2) (n) IPC and Section 3 (1) (r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act 2015.

3.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had love affair with the victim. On the pretext of marriage, he had physical relationship with the victim. Thereafter, he married another girl. Even thereafter, the appellant continued his love affair with the victim girl assuring that he will divorce his first wife and

will marry the victim. That apart, the petitioner had also taken videos while they were in compromise position. During the relationship, the victim had also paid Rs.16,30,000/- to the appellant and he had returned Rs.5,50,000/- to the victim during the panchayat.

4.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents 1 & 2.

5.In view of the submissions made, this Court is of the view that the appellant had committed very serious and heinous offences against the victim girl and the Trial Court has rightly dismissed the petition and this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Trial Court. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed.

26-08-2025 sli Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The State Rep by, The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Hosur.

Cr.No.71/2025.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4.The Principal Session Judge, Krishnagiri.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.

sli 26-08-2025