IMPORTANT POINT
The completion of investigation, filing of the charge sheet, and the requirement to complete the trial within a specified period under Section 14 of SC/ST Act influenced the court's decision to grant bail to the appellant.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, to call for the records in pursuant to Crl.M.P.No.1374 of 2023 vide order dated 19.12.2023 on the file of the Special Court of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Vellore, Vellore District and set aside the same and enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.137 of 2022 pending on the file of the respondent police.)

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the impugned order in Crl.M.P.No.1374 of 2023 dated 19.12.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Vellore and enlarge the appellant on bail in connection with Crime No.137 of 2022 on the file of the second respondent Police.

2. The appellant, who is A8 in Crime No.137 of 2022 for offences under Sections 364, 302, 201, 147, 148, 120(b), 109 and 212 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, was arrested by the respondent police on 15.09.2023. The appellant filed a bail application before the learned Sessions Judge, Vellore in Crl.M.P.No.1374 of 2023 and the same was dismissed vide impugned order, dated 19.12.2023. Aggrieved over the same, the present Criminal Appeal is filed.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for appellant is that there is no overt act attributed against the appellant. The appellant is said to have present along with the other accused when the de-facto complainant's son was cut into pieces and done away. Her complaint is that on 09.07.2022 around 8.30 p.m., when the de-facto complainant, her daughter-in-law and her son, namely, Sarath Kumar were in the house, three unknown persons came into the house and warned her son Sarath Kumar to behave properly and left the house. Around 10.30 p.m., they again came to her house and kidnapped her son Sarath Kumar and took him in a two wheeler. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant and her daughter-in-law searched for Sarath Kumar. On the next day, on 10.07.2022, they were informed about the body of Sarath Kumar cut into pieces found near cemetery. Thereafter, complaint lodged on 10.07.2022.

4. The further contention of the learned counsel for appellant is that earlier on 20.06.2023, one Vandu @ Rajesh, Vinoth, M.G.Ramachandran, Bill @ Suriya and Murugesan attempted to murder the said Sarath Kumar by stabbing him with knife on head, hand, neck and face and de-facto complainant had suspicion on the above said persons. The appellant name does not find place in the F.I.R. Only on the confession of the co-accused, he has been arrayed as an accused. Though, he has been arrayed as accused, no specific overt act attributed against him. Further submitted that in this case, A1 to A6 were arrested and granted bail by the Lower Court. A7 was granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.20362 of 2022, A9 was granted anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No.31291 of 2022. Except this appellant, all the other accused were granted bail. He further submitted that in this case, investigation completed, charge sheet filed and the same is taken on file in S.C.No.35 of 2023.

5. He further submitted that the appellant filed a bail application in Crl.M.P.No.1374 of 2023 on 14.12.2023 seeking statutory bail. The Lower Court by its order dated 19.12.2023, dismissed the bail application, in which it is recorded that the appellant/accused was remanded on 15.09.2023, the charge sheet filed by the respondent police through online on 21.11.2023 and the same is pending for rectification of defects, which is a hand written correction. Originally the order reads that “..... the charge sheet filed by the respondent police through online on 21.11.2023 and the same has been returned on 01.12.2023 by this Court”.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed his counter and submitted that the case of the prosecution is that the