Rajkumar v. The State Rep. By The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

1. Rajkumar S/o.Kali, Latchumipuram, Kuyilapalaiyam, Vanur (Taluk), Villupuram.

Appellant(s) Vs

1. The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District.

2.The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Kandamangalam Police Station, Villupuram. Crime No.263 of 2025 3.Tamizhkudi, S/o.Jegadheesan, Thirowpathy amman koil street, Palli neliyanur, Villupuram.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER To set aside the order passed by the Hon'ble special court for exclusive trial of cases registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, villupuram in Crl.M.P.No.311 of 2025 dated 10.09.2025 and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime.No.263 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Appellant(s):

R.Subramanian M.Praveen Kumar S.Saravanan A.Dhinesh Kumar For Respondents 1 & 2:

Mr. V. Meganathan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R3 None appeared

ORDER

This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed by the special court for exclusive trial of cases registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, Villupuram in Crl.M.P.No.311 of 2025 dated 10.09.2025 and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.263 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant had allegedly posted Videos and made statements on public platforms such as Facebook, Whatsapp, and Youtube making a castiest remarks against other communities using

derogatory and offensive language and issuing threats of violence. Hence, respondent police registered FIR under Sections 296(B), 196, 353(2), 351(2), 112 of BNS and Sections 3(1)(u) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015 in crime No. 263 of 2025 and thereby, the respondent police arrested and remanded the appellant to judicial custody 02.09.2025.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case as if he made castiest remarks against the defacto complainant's community. In fact, the the appellant has not made any derogatory remarks against any communities including the defacto complainant community. Further, he submits that the appellant is ready to abide with any conditions. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the appellant.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the appellant is having 6 previous cases, including murder case.

5. Notice served to the defacto complainant, none appeared.

6. On perusal of video clippings produced by the respondent police, it reveals that the appellant had posted video in his Social Media account with unparliamentary words but he was not mentioned anything about particular

community. The conduct of the appellant shows that he used to do such offence and cause unnecessary trouble to the society. As per the Government Advocate (Crl. Side) investigation is almost completed and he is under the judicial from 02.09.2025. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant with the following conditions.

5. Accordingly, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties ( one must be a blood surety), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, Villupuram and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the appellant shall report before the respondent police every Tuesday and Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. Further, the appellant is directed to file an undertaking affidavit before the Trial Court that he

would not indulge in similar offence and shall not to make any derogatory remarks against any community in Social Media or any other mode, in future. If he breaches any of the condition, bail will be cancelled. [c] the appellant shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellant in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellant released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

30-10-2025 pbl Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

pbl To

1. The Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, Villupuram.

2. The Central Prison, Cuddalore.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4. The Inspector of Police, Kandamangalam Police Station, Villupuram.

30-10-2025