Back
K. MURALI SHANKAR
Sathiya Raj – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by its The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (PoA) Act 1989 as amended by Act 1/2016, to call for the entire records in relating to the impugned order dated 20.03.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.342 of 2023 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of cases registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 Ramanathapuram and to set aside the same and consequently to release the appellant on bail in connection with the FIR in Crime No.49 of 2023 on the file of the second respondent police.)
1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.342 of 2023 dated 20.03.2023 by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases Registered under SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramanathapuram (FAC).
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.03.2023, the appellant along with the other accused had attacked the third respondent/defacto complainant with deadly weapons and abused him by using his caste name and also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the third respondent registered a case against three named persons including the appellant and 7 unnamed persons in Crime No.49 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 3
The court considered the appellant's judicial custody, lack of previous similar or serious offenses, and the absence of serious injuries in the incident as grounds for allowing the Criminal Appeal an....
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.
The court's decision to grant bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act was influenced by the circumstances of the case, including the previous enmity between the parties and the discharge of the injured.
The court considered the circumstances of the case and the appellant's lack of previous cases in deciding to grant bail under the SC/ST(POA) Act.
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 absence of previous cases and the discharge of the injured from the hospital as grounds for granting bail to the appellant.
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 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 has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances and duration of custody.
The court considered the appellant's judicial custody, lack of previous similar offenses, and other circumstances in allowing the criminal appeal and granting bail.
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
