Allowed

Vinoth @ Ravichandran v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC17 Sept 2025CRL A(MD)/950/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two accused in a caste-based assault case, denied bail by the Special Court for PCR at Karur, appealed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. Noting no prior criminal record and that the injured complainant had been discharged, the court granted bail with conditions requiring residence at Madurai and daily reporting.

What did the court decide?

Appellants released on bail on Rs.25,000 bonds with two sureties each, with conditions including stay at Madurai and daily reporting to Inspector of Police, K.Pudur Police Station.

Vinoth @ Ravichandran Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Caste Atrocities | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL.A(MD).No. 950 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATE : 17.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

CRL.A(MD).No.950 of 2025

¶7

1.Vinoth @ Ravichandran 2.Balakumar : Appellants/A1 and A2

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kulittalai, Karur District.

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Lalpet Police Station, Karur District. In Crime No.285/2025. : Respondents 1 and 2/ Respondents 1 and 2/ Complainants 3.Dharmarajan : 3^rd Respondent/De-facto Complainant

¶11

Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Schedule Caste and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 2015 as amended by Act 1 of 2016, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.1375 of 2025 on the file of the District and Sessions Court (Special Court for PCR), Karur, dated 25.08.2025 and set aside the same as illegal and enlarge the appellants on bail.

¶12

1/7

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

CRL.A(MD).No. 950 of 2025

¶15

For Appellants : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed For R1 and R2 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶16

For 3^rd Respondent : Mr.S.Sundara Moorthy

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

This Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking orders to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1375 of 2025, dated 25.08.2025, on the file of the District and Sessions Court (Special Court for PCR), Karur, dismissing the petition for bail.

¶19

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 10/08/2025 at about 10.45 am, the de-facto complainant was returning from the Lalpettai Police Station along with one Palanisamy after signing respondent police. While there were travelling on a two wheeler which was driven by one Palanisamy and the de-facto complainant as a pillion rider, near Veerakumaran Patti Channel bridge, all the accused persons scolded the de-facto complainant with filthy language and A1 assaulted him with billhook on his head, A2 assaulted him with hands on his face, as a result of which, two tooth of the de-facto complainant fell down. A3 assaulted

¶20

2/7

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

CRL.A(MD).No. 950 of 2025

¶23

the de-facto complainant with sticks and A4 kicked the de-facto complainant on his chest and thereby, caused injuries. In this connection, a case in Crime No.285 of 2025 was registered by the 2^nd respondent Police against the appellants and other accused persons, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2) and 109 of BNS, 2023 and section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The appellants were in judicial custody from 11.08.2025. The appellants filed a petition for bail in Crl.M.P.No.1375 of 2025 and the same was dismissed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Karur, on 25.08.2025. Challenging the same, the appellants have preferred this Criminal appeal.

¶24

3.The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appellants are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the appellants are in judicial custody from 11.08.2025 and they are not having any previous case and the injured was discharged from the hospital. It is further submitted that A3 was already granted bail by the District and Sessions Judge, Karur,

¶25

3/7

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

CRL.A(MD).No. 950 of 2025

¶28

4.The third respondent/de-facto complainant would submit that the

¶29

de-facto complainant has sustained serious injuries and there is every possibility for the accused to threaten the de-facto complainant and that in case, if bail is granted to the appellants, they may be directed to stay away from Karur District.

¶30

5.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the investigation is pending; and that the accused have caused serious injuries on the de-facto complainant. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital and that the appellants are not having any previous case.

¶31

6.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and that

¶32

the appellants are not having any previous case and that the injured was discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order, dated 25.08.2025 made in Crl.M.P. No.1375 of 2025 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, (Special Court for PCR), Karur.

¶33

4/7

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

CRL.A(MD).No. 950 of 2025

¶36

7.Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order, dated

¶37

25.08.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.1375 of 2025 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge (Special Court for PCR), Karur, is set aside. The appellants are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond each 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 learned District and Sessions Judge, (Special Court for PCR), Karur, and on further conditions that:

¶38

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned District and Sessions Judge, (Special Court for PCR), Karur, may obtain a copy of their valid identity card to ensure their identity.

¶39

(b) the appellants are directed to stay at Madurai and appear before the Inspector of Police, K.Pudur Police Station, daily at

¶40

10.30 am, until further orders .

¶41

¶42

(d) the appellants shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶43

(e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned

¶44

Judge/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the

¶45