Delay in filing a final report under the SC/ST Act, if duly explained, does not invalidate proceedings, especially in cases involving severe offenses like murder or conspiracy.

JUDGMENT :

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

Accused Nos.3, 5, 8 and 13 have filed the criminal appeal in Crl.A.(MD). No.118 of 2026 under section 14-A (1) of SC and ST (POA) Act, challenging the dismissal of discharge petition vide impugned order in Crl.M.P.No.278 of 2025 in S.C.No.25 of 2023 on the file of Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi, dated 29.12.2025.

2. Similarly, Accused No.A2, A4, A9, A10 and A11 have filed the criminal appeal in Crl.A.(MD) No.176 of 2026 under section 14-A (1I) of SC and ST (POA) Act, challenging the dismissal of discharge petition vide impugned order in Crl.M.PNo.279 of 2025 in S.C.No.25 of 2023 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi dated 29.12.2025.

3. Accused No.A1 and A 12 have filed the criminal appeal in Crl.A.(MD) No.204 of 2026 under section 14-A (1) of SC and ST (POA) Act, challenging the dismissal of discharge petition vide impugned order in Crl.M.PNo.277 of 2025 in S.C.No.25 of 2023 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thoothukudi dated 29.12.2025.

4. According to the prosecution, deceased P.K.Muthukumar, had two brothers namely, P.K.Ramkumar and P.K.Sivakumar. He was practising advocate in Thoothukudi Bar Association. Earlier, on 21.08.2019, his brother was murdered by a mob in front of the court campus in the presence of the deceased P.K.Muthkumar and defacto complainant. Hence, complaint was made and on receipt of the complaint, Thoothukudi South Police officials registered the case in Crime No.533 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 302, 506(2), 120 – B, 34, 109 of IPC r/w. Section 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (POA) Act. Thereafter final report was filed. In the said case deceased P.K.Muthukumar and another brother namely, the second respondent Ramkumar were persistently taking steps to in intervene in the bail application filed by the all the accused. The same infuriated and provoked the appellants herein to eliminate the deceased said Muthukumar as he was hurdle to them for getting bail. Therefore, appellants and other accused in the earlier case conspired to commit murder of said Muthukumar and infurtherence of the conspiracy on 22.02.2023 at 2.15 p.m. Accused No.1 in the case wearing helmet along with identifiable four persons wielding aruval, lathi trespassed into the pawn shop situated at Bazar owned by the deceased Muthukumar and another identifiable accused came in a motor cycle and they fled away from the scene of the occurrence. Thereafter, FIR was registered by the SIPCOT Police Station in Crime No.48 of 2023 upon receipt of the complaint from the second respondent namely defacto complainant. They registered the case for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 449, 302, and 109 IPC r/w. Section 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (POA) Act. The investigating officer conducted investigation and filed the final report against the appellants and other accused on 24.05.2023. The appellants have filed the petitions to discharge them from the case on the ground that the final report has not been filed within a period of sixty days and the investigating officer has also not filed any written explanation and hence, there is a violation of Rule 7(2) and 7(2-A) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 as amended in the year 2016 (herein after called as “Rules”). The learned trial Judge after considering the entire Rule position and the factual aspect dismissed their applications vide impugned orders. Challenging the same, the present Cr