Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
Kannan @ Suresh Kannan - Appellant
Versus
State through The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli & Others - Respondent
CRL.A(MD). No. 355 of 2022
Decided On : 29-06-2022
Bail - SC/ST (POA) Act - The court allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the order of the Special Court, granting bail to the appellant under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was in judicial custody in connection with a murder case and had filed a petition for bail, which was dismissed by the Special Court. The appellant had been remanded since 28.07.2021 and was involved in multiple previous cases.
Finding of the Court:
Considering the appellant's custody, the grant of bail to a similarly placed accused, the filing of the charge sheet, and the pending trial, the court allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the order, granting bail to the appellant.
Issues: The main issue was the appellant's eligibility for bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act, given the circumstances of the case and the objections raised by the State.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the appellant's prolonged custody, the grant of bail to a similarly placed accused, and the stage of the trial, as evidenced by the filing of the charge sheet and the pending trial.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was allowed, and the order granting bail to the appellant was set aside. The appellant was ordered to be released on bail under specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Schedule Caste and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, to set aside the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi, in Cr.M.P.No.472 of 2022, dated 29.04.2022 and to enlarge the appellant on bail.)
1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.472 of 2022, dated 29.04.2022, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi.
2. A case in Crime No.2 of 2015 was registered by the respondent Police, against the appellant, under Sections 147, 148, 109, 120(b), 302 r/w 149 IPC and Section 25(1-b) of Arms Act 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 and the case was taken on file in S.C.No.38 of 2021. The petitioner was released on bail, but he failed to appear before the trial Court on 11.11.2022 and the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti issued NBW against the petitioner and the petitioner was remanded on 28.07.2021. The appellant filed a petition for bail in Crl.M.P.No.472 of 2022 and the same was dismissed by the Special Court on 29.04.2022. Challenging the same, the appellant has preferred this Criminal appeal.
3.The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that when the petitioner was in judicial custody in connection with a murder case, on the PT warrant, he was produced before the committal Magistrate and he was remanded to judicial custody so far as the present case is concerned on 28.07.2021 and that the petitioner is in custody till now. He would further submit that the fifth accused Maruthupandi, who is similarly placed accused has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.A(MD).No.20 of 2022, vide judgment dated 04.02.2022.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that the petitioner is involved in 25 previous cases and that they are having objections to release the petitioner on bail.
5. It is not in dispute that the charge sheet has already been laid before the committal Court and the case was committed to the Sessions Court and the case is pending in S.C.No.38 of 2021 on the file of the Special Court for trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi.
6. Despite receipt of Court notice and printing of name in the cause list, there is no representation for the third respondent.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also the facts that the appellant is in judicial custody from 28.07.2021, and that the similarly placed accused has already granted bail by this Court in Crl.A(MD)No.20 of 2022, that the charge sheet has been filed and the case is pending for trial in S.C.No.38 of 2021, this Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order, dated 29.04.2022 made in Cr.M.P.No.472 of 2022 on the file of the Special Court for trial of cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order, dated 29.04.2022 made in Cr.M.P.No.472 of 2022 on the file of the Special Court for trial of cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi, 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 cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi, 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, Special Court for trial of cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi may obtain a copy of their valid identity card to ensure their identity.
(b) the appellant is directed to appear before the trial Court on all working days 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 app
The court considered the appellant's custody, the grant of bail to a similarly placed accused, and the stage of the trial in deciding to set aside the order granting bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the appellant's custody, previous cases, and specific allegations in determining eligibility for bail in a case involving the ....
The court considered the appellant's judicial custody, lack of previous similar offenses, and other circumstances in allowing the criminal appeal and granting bail.
The court considered the period of incarceration and the absence of a presiding officer in the Special Court as factors in granting bail to the appellant.
Compliance with bail conditions and being in judicial custody can influence the decision to grant bail.
The main legal point established is that the decision to grant bail in cases involving serious charges and potential witness tampering or absconding should consider factors such as the accused's ante....
The court considered the circumstances of the case, including the appellant's custody and non-appearance for a hearing, in granting bail.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the charges against the appellant.
The court considered the nature of the allegations and the appellant's custody period in deciding to grant bail with conditions.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the period of incarceration, the progress of the investigation, and the circumstances of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
