Allowed

Manikandan v. State Rep. by

Madras HC2 Sept 2020CRL A/344/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal against the dismissal of a bail application. Setting aside the Special Court's order, the Court granted bail to the appellant under the SC/ST Act, subject to conditions including a bond, appearance requirements, and prohibition on tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 21.08.2020 in Crl.M.P.No.781 of 2020 dismissed; appellant released on bail under specific conditions.

Manikandan Vs State Rep. by — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.09.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶6

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

¶7

Manikandan Appellant
vs.
1 State represented by
the Inspector of Police
Manalurpet Police Station
Villupuram District
(Cr. No.1092 of 2020)
2 Govindaraj Respondents

¶8

Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes

¶9

and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, to set aside the order dated 21.08.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.781 of 2020 on the file of the

¶10

Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram and to enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶11

For appellant Mr. A. Balamurugan For R1 Mrs. P. Kritika Kamal Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

This case is taken up through video conferencing.

¶14

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶15

1/6

¶16

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

¶17

2 On a complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first

¶18

respondent police registered a case in Cr. No.1092 of 2020 on 30.07.2020 under Sections 341, 294(b) and 506(II) IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

¶19

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity “the SC/ST Act”) and arrested the appellant

¶20

on 18.08.2020.

¶21

3 It is alleged by the de facto complainant that on account of previous enmity, the appellant had abused him by referring to his caste name.

¶22

4 The bail application in Crl.M.P. No.781 of 2020 that was filed

¶23

by the appellant has been dismissed by the Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram, on 21.08.2020, challenging which, the instant criminal appeal has been preferred seeking bail.

¶24

5 Heard Mr. A. Balamurugan, learned counsel for the appellant

¶25

and Mrs. P. Kritika Kamal, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶26

appearing for the first respondent State. Though private notice has been served on the second respondent and affidavit of service filed, there is no

¶27

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶28

2/6

¶29

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

¶30

representation for the second respondent.

¶31

6 A thorough reading of the FIR shows that the appellant

¶32

suspected that the de facto complainant was a police informant and he (appellant) was abusively speaking about the de facto complainant amongst

¶33

his friends, which was overheard by the de facto complainant.

¶34

7 Taking into consideration the nature of allegation in the FIR, the fact that there was no physical violence and that the appellant has been in

¶35

custody since 18.08.2020, this Court is of the view that interests of justice

¶36

will be served, if the appellant is released on bail.

¶37

8 Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed by setting aside the order dated 21.08.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.781 of 2020 on the file of the Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram and the appellant is ordered to be released on bail on the following conditions:

¶38

[i] the appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, of whom, one should be a blood relative, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram;

¶39

[ii] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Special Judge for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram, may obtain a copy of their aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

¶40

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶41

3/6

¶42

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

¶43

[iii] On release, the appellant shall appear before the trial Court, everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and he shall appear before the respondent police as well, as and when required.

¶44

[iv] The appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial and shall also not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶45

[v] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the Special Judge for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram, 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 Special Judge for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram, himself, as laid down by the Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala¹ ;

¶46

[vi] if the appellant thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered against him under Section 229-A IPC; and

¶47

[vii] if the appellant does not comply with the condition (i) above, the Special Judge for SC/ST Act Cases, Villupuram, may take him into custody.

¶48

02.09.2020

¶49

cad

¶50

Note to Office: Issue order copy today itself

¶51

1 (2005) AIR SCW 5560 http://www.judis.nic.in

4/6

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

1 The Inspector of Police Manalurpet Police Station Villupuram

¶56

2 The Special Judge for SC/ST Act Cases Villupuram

¶57

3 The Superintendent Sub-Jail Thirukovilur

¶58

4 The Public Prosecutor Madras High Court Chennai – 600 104

¶59

http://www.judis.nic.in

5/6

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

P.N.PRAKASH, J.

cad

Crl.A.No.344 of 2020

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶66

02.09.2020

¶67

6/6

Manikandan v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manikandan v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Maheswari Vs State Represented by

K.Kalaivani Vs State by

R.Kirbavathi, Vs State Rep. by

Selvi Vs State Rep.by

Jestinraj Vs State Rep.by Its

R.Elangovan Vs State by