BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
Manikandan @ Dinesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dindigul & Another - Respondents
Crl. A.(MD)No. 161 of 2023
Decided On : 20-03-2023
Scheduled Caste - Bail Application - Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 506(2) IPC and Sections 3(l)(r), 3(l)(s), 3(l)(m), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed a Criminal Appeal to set aside the order of the Special Court and enlarge the appellant on bail in a case involving abuse and injury to the defacto complainant based on his caste, leading to the registration of FIR under various sections of IPC and the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the appellant had complied with the conditions imposed by the Special Court and had been in judicial custody since 17.02.2023, leading to the decision to set aside the order and grant bail to the appellant.
Issues: Compliance with bail conditions, subsequent cases and judicial custody.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellant's compliance with bail conditions and being in judicial custody influenced the Court's decision to grant bail.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was allowed, and the order of the Special Court was set aside, granting bail to the appellant with specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14(A)(2) of Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, to set aside the order of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul in Crl.M.P.No.281 of 2023 dated 21.02.2023 and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.156 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police.)
1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul in Crl.M.P.No.281 of 2023 dated 21.02.2023 and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.156 of 2022.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.03.2022 at about 10.25 p.m., when the defacto complainant was proceeding in his two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-57-D-4119 near Reliance Petrol Bunk, the accused 1 to 4 came in the vehicles, blocked the defacto complainant''s way and abused him by using his caste name, that the accused 2 to 4 asked the first accused to dash the vehicle and the first accused dashed against the vehicle and as a result of which, the defacto complainant got blood injury on his left leg and that when the villagers had intervened, the accused 1 to 4, after criminally intimidating the defacto complainant, had escaped from the spot and on the basis of the complaint given by the defacto complainant, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.156 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 341, 323 and 506(2) IPC and Sections 3(l)(r), 3(l)(s), 3(l)(m) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.
3. It is evident from the records that the accused including the appellant have filed a criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6404 of 2022 seeking direction to the Principal District Court, Thanjavur, to consider the petitioners'' bail application and dispose of the same on the same day and that this Court, vide order dated 06.04.2022, has directed the petitioners to surrender before the jurisdictional Court within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of that order and directed the Principal District Court to consider their application preferably on the same day of their surrender and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity to the victim under Section 15(a) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. In pursuance of the same, the accused have surrendered before the jurisdictional Court and obtained bail.
4. It is further evident from the records that the first respondent herein has filed a petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. in Crl.M.P.No.484 of 2022 in Crl.M.P.No.393 of 2022 seeking cancellation of bail on the ground that the accused including the appellant have not complied with the order passed by the Special Court and that the learned Sessions Judge, after enquiry, has passed an order dated 16.09.2022 cancelling the bail.
5. It is further evident that the accused including the appellant have challenged the order cancelling the bail before this Court in Crl.A.(MD)No. 612 of 2022 and the learned Judge of this Court, vide order dated 02.12.2022, dismissed the same. Subsequently, the appellant was arrested on 17.02.2023 and was remanded to judicial custody.
6. It is further evident that the appellant has filed an application for bail in Crl.M.P.No.281 of 2023 before the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul and the learned Sessions Judge, vide order dated 21.02.2023, has dismissed the bail petition. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the bail petition, the first accused has now come forward with the present appeal.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent would submit that the other accused are still absconding, that investigation is pending and that the appellant is having three other previous cases.
8. The learned counsel appearing
The court considered the absence of previous cases and the discharge of the injured from the hospital as grounds for granting bail to the appellant.
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 ....
Bail granted to accused lacking specific allegations in FIR, parity with co-accused, despite SC/ST atrocity charges.
The decision to grant bail was based on the appellants' custody period, lack of previous similar or serious offences, and objections raised to granting bail.
The court considered the circumstances of the case, including the appellant's custody and non-appearance for a hearing, in granting bail.
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 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 considered the period of incarceration and the absence of a presiding officer in the Special Court as factors in granting bail to the appellant.
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.