Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
Syed Sirajudeen – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kulasekarapattinam Police Station, Tuticorin & Others – Respondents
Crl. A (MD). No. 333 of 2023
Decided On : 21-04-2023
Criminal Appeal - SC/ST (POA) Act - The court allowed the Criminal Appeal, set aside the order denying bail, and ordered the release of the appellant on bail with specific conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was accused of abusing and causing the suicide of a sweeper by using his caste name. The appellant filed a petition for bail, which was initially dismissed by the Sessions Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the charges against the appellant, it was inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal, set aside the previous order, and ordered the release of the appellant on bail with specific conditions.
Issues: The main issue was the appellant's request for bail after being accused of causing the suicide of a sweeper by using his caste name.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the charges against the appellant, and the arguments presented by the appellant's counsel and the Additional Public Prosecutor before allowing the Criminal Appeal and granting bail.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was allowed, the previous order was set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released on bail with 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 call for the records and set aside the order dated 18.04.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.310 of 2023 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Tuticorin and enlarge the appellant on bail.)
1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.310 of 2023, dated 18.04.2023, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST(POA) Act, Thoothukudi (FAC), and enlarge the appellant on bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant''s husband was working as sweeper in Udangudi Panchayat for the past 30 years and the then President/A1 has demanded money for his promotion. On 17.03.2023, when the defacto complainant''s husband was present in the Panchayat Office on Muster roll, the accused abused him in filthy language and using his caste name, unable to tolerate the humiliation caused, he had committed suicide by consuming poison. After investigation, the respondent Police has registered case in Crime No.45 of 2023 against the appellant and other accused persons, under Sections 294(b), 186, 306, 109, 212 of IPC, and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (v) of SC/ST(POA)Act. He has filed a petition for bail in Cr.M.P.No.310 of 2023 and the same was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Thoothukudi, on 18.04.2023. Challenging the same, the appellant has preferred this Criminal appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the appellant is in judicial custody from 04.04.2023.
4. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant/third respondent has raised objections to grant bail to the appellant.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that the appellant transferred some amount to the fifth accused in order to harbour/conceal first accused. He would further submit that the appellant is in judicial custody from 22.03.2023.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the charges levelled against the appellant, this Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order, dated 18.04.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.310 of 2023 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST(POA) Act Cases, Thoothukudi.(FAC).
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order, dated 18.04.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.310 of 2023 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of SC/ST(POA) Act Cases, Tuticorin (FAC), 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 learned Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Tuticorin District, and on further conditions that:
(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Tuticorin, may obtain a copy of their valid identity card to ensure their identity.
(b) the appellant shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 am, until further orders.
(c) the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
(d) the appellant shall co-operate with the investigation.
(e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court 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
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.
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 has the discretion to grant bail with specific conditions, taking into account the period of incarceration, the appellant's criminal history, and the complainant's apprehension.
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 absence of previous cases and the discharge of the injured from the hospital as grounds for granting bail to the appellant.
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 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 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.
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
