Sanjay v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.11.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Sanjay ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, Polur, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Chetpet Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3. Jayaseelan ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the District Special Judge for exclusive trial of SC/ST cases, Thiruvannamalai to consider the bail application filed by the petitioner on his surrender in connection with Crime No.268 of 2024 on the file of the second respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Amarnath For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the District Special Judge for exclusive trial of SC/ST cases, Thiruvannamalai to consider the bail application filed by the petitioner on his surrender in connection with Crime No.268 of 2024 on the file of the second respondent police.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the official respondents and perused the materials available on record.

3. It is to be noted that as per Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "SC/ST Act"), there is a bar to file a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C./483 of B.N.S.S. Therefore Anticipatory Bail is not maintainable for the offence under the SC/ST Act. Further Section 15A under Chapter IV-A was introduced by Act 1 of 2016 w.e.f. 26.01.2016, as per which,

notice has to be sent to the victim, in respect of any proceedings and without giving notice, no proceedings shall be proceeded further. Further, the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of B.N.S.S. should not be invoked automatically and the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of B.N.S.S. should be exercised sparingly. When there is a specific bar under the Special Act, this Court cannot ignore the intention of the Legislators and the purpose of enactment of the Special Act. If the petitioners application is directed to be considered on the same day without giving notice to the victim, the purpose of Sections 18 and 15A(3)(5) of SC/ST Act would be defeated and the same would curtail the statutory right of the victim.

4. Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to invoke Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of B.N.S.S., which would amount to ignoring the provisions of the Special Act. Therefore, this petition shall stand dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy in the manner known to law and the learned Special Judge/Magistrate is directed to exercise his/her discretionary power after giving notice to the

victim. The learned Special Judge/Magistrate is also directed to adhere the statutory provisions of Sections 18 and 15 A (3)(5) of SC/ST Act. 25.11.2024 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No Copy to:

The District Special Judge for exclusive trial of SC/ST cases, Thiruvannamalai.

To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Polur, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Chetpet Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

mfa 25.11.2024