w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Prabu @ Prabaharan & Others v/s The State rep by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Namakkal

    Criminal Appeal No. 758 of 2017

    Decided On, 06 December 2017

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras


    For the Appellants: K. Kalimuthu, Advocate. For the Respondent: K. Madhan, Govt. Advocate.

Judgment Text

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 14(A) of Scheduled Caste and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015 against the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal in CMP No.1235 of 2017 dated 13.11.2017.)

1. On the complaint lodged by one Mr.Sathishkumar, the respondent police registered a

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

case in Cr.No.381 of 2017 on 19.10.2017 for the offence punishable under Secs.147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 307 IPC and Secs.3(1)(r) and 3(2)(v) of The Schedule Caste and The Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015 against three named accused and unnamed others.

2. The petitioners, who are not named in the first information report, were arrested on 20.10.2017 and were remanded to custody. The petitioners filed a petition in CMP No.1235/2017 for bail before the Special Court, which has been dismissed by the Special Court on 13.11.2017. Aggrieved by which, this appeal has been preferred by the petitioners.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side).

4. On a reading of the first information report, it is alleged that these petitioners have attacked the defacto-complainant and the defacto-complainant suffered injuries on his thigh.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the defacto-complainant has been discharged from the hospital and there are long pending civil disputes between the accused party and the defacto-complainant party. The learned Government Advocate also submitted that there were cases and counter cases registered against each other regarding the same issue.

6. Taking into consideration the facts that the petitioners are in incarceration from 20.10.2017 and investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties, of whom, one should be a blood related surety, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal and on further condition that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioners shall report before Principal Sessions Court, Namakkal daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required.

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Sessions Judge/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

8. In the result, the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal in CMP No.1235 of 2017 dated 13.11.2017 is set aside and the Criminal Appeal is allowed.

Already A Member?