← Library
Madras High CourtCRL A(MD)/455/2023allowed

Poopathy v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

2023-06-26Honourable Mr Justice K.Murali Shankar6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATE : 26.06.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR Poopathy ... Appellant/ Accused No.4 Vs.

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai Town Division, Pudukkottai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thirukokarnam Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

(Crime No.146 of 2023) ... 1st and 2nd Respondents/ Complainants 3.Karthik Raja ... 3rd Respondent/Defacto Complainant 4.Muruganandam ... 4th Respondent/Victim Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (POA) Amended Act, 2015, to set aside the order passed by the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukkottai made in Crl.M.P.No. 1 / 6

1020 of 2023 and allow this appeal by enlarging the appellant on bail in FIR No.146 of 2023 on the file of the second respondent police. For Appellant : Mr.S.Sathya Chithambaram For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Sivakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R3 : Mr.VRG.Mohan Legal Aid Counsel

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed by the learned Special Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukkottai, in Cr.M.P.No.1020 of 2023 dated 13.06.2023 and enlarge the appellant on bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there existed money dispute between the third respondent and the first accused's family and that on 29.05.2023 at about 04.30 p.m., the third respondent and his family members went to the relative condolence, at that time, the appellant and the other accused had attacked the respondents 3 and 4 with deadly weapons, abused them in filthy language and also threatened them with 2 / 6

dire consequences. Hence, the second respondent registered a case in Crime No.146 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 307 and 506(2) IPC altered into Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 307 and 506(2) IPC r/w Sections 3(l)(r)(s) and 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the appellant has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that the appellant is in judicial custody from 30.05.2023.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that during the funeral procession of the third respondent's cousin's grandmother, the present incident came to be occurred and that two injured were already discharged from the hospital. He would further submit that the appellant is having 10 previous cases, in which, 6 cases were already disposed of.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent has raised objections to grant bail to the appellant. 3 / 6

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances and also the facts that the injured were already discharged from the hospital and that the appellant is in judicial custody from 30.05.2023, this Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order, dated 13.06.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.1020 of 2023 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukkottai.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order dated 13.06.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.1020 of 2023 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukkottai, is set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukkottai, and on further conditions that: [a]the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Sessions Judge may obtain a copy of their valid identity card to ensure their identity.

4 / 6

[b]the appellant shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c]the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d]the appellant shall co-operate with the investigation.

[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Sessions Judge/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 is released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge/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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC. 26.06.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No csm 5 / 6

K.MURALI SHANKAR, J.

csm To 1.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Pudukkottai.

2.The Special Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST Act Cases, Pudukkottai.

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai Town Division, Pudukkottai District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Thirukokarnam Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

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

Crl.A.(MD)No.455 of 2023 Dated : 26.06.2023 6 / 6