M.Manikandan @ Kool Mani v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATE : 16.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA M.Manikandan @ Kool Mani ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aravakurichi Range, Karur District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District.

Crime No.778/2020.

3. Ramesh ... Respondents Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (PoA) Act to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.586 of 2025 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Karur on 25.04.2025 and enlarge the petitioner/A7 on bail in Spl.SC No.21 of 2023 on the file of learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Karur.

1 / 5

For Appellants : Mr.Niranjan S Kumar For R1 & R2 : Mr.K.Gnanasekaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For R3 : No appearance

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Karur in Cr.M.P.No.586 of 2025 dated 25.04.2025.

2. The appellant is A7, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.11.2024.

3.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been in judicial custody for nearly 223 days and after he was secured, the trial has not been proceeded in a phased manner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that in this case, examination of witnesses in the mother case has already been completed. In view of the warrant pending against this appellant and A9, a separate case has been split up. It appears that the learned 2 / 5

trial Judge has dismissed the bail petition of the appellant on the ground that there are many previous cases pending against him and he is a history sheeted rowdy.

5.As the appellant was absconding from 10.06.2022, the trial Court was compelled to split up the case against him and conduct a separate trial. If the appellant once again abscond, in the event of his release on bail, it would defeat the entire trial process.

6.It is to be noted that the trial Court has already conducted the trial in the mother case and that is part heard. Now, the trial in the split up case is also progressing.

7.Under such circumstances, I feel that the apprehension of the trial Court that if the appellant is released on bail, he would hamper the trial is not unreasonable. In that case, it would be appropriate for the trial Court to conduct the case on day to day basis and complete the trial as early as possible. 8.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in this case many of the witnesses have turned hostile.

3 / 5

9.In such case, the appellant can withstand the trial, with a direction to the trial Court to complete the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably, by posting the case on day to day basis.

10.With the above observations, this Criminal Appeal stands disposed of.

16.07.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No PNM To 1.The Sessions Judge, Special Sessions Court for Exclusive trial of cases under SC/ST Act Cases, Sivagangai 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruppathur Sub division, Sivagangai District 3.The Jail Superintendent, District Jail, Ramanathapuram 4.The Inspector of Police, S.V.Mangalam Police Station, Sivagangai District.

5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4 / 5

R.N.MANJULA, J.

PNM JUDGMENT IN Crl.A.(MD)No.601 of 2025 16.07.2025 5 / 5