Krishnakumar vs The State Represented by The Deputy Superintendent

Court
Madras High Court

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
CRL A No. 1127 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012127152026}
Krishnakumar,
S/o.Kannan,
No.58B/86, Thiruparankundram main road,
Kumaragam,
Madurai – 625 003.
...Appellant/Petitioner/
A1
Vs
1. The State Represented by
The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Sankari Police Station,
Sankari Sub Division,
Salem District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Sankari Police Station,
Salem District - 637301.
Crime No.327 of 2026.
3. Sulochana
W/o. Krishnakumar,
Door No.14/5/1D,
Vasantham Colony Street,
Near Vidya Sakar School,
Nagichettipatti,
Kundachikkadu,
Morur,
__________
Page1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
Sankari Taluk,
Salem District - 637302.
...Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14A of SC/ST (POA) Act,
1989, praying to call for the records of order passed in Crl.M.P.No.323 of
2026 on the file of the Hon’ble Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC
and ST (POA) Act, Salem and set aside the same and pleased to grant bail
to the Appellant/A1 in Crime No.327 of 2026 on the file of the 2nd
Respondent Police, Salem District.
For Appellant: Mr.A.J.Mohamed Kassim
For Respondents : Ms.Sharada Vivek
Additional Public Prosecutor
for R1 and R2
Mr.P.Gowtham,
Legal Aid Counsel
for R3
JUDGMENT
The Criminal Appeal challenges the order passed by the learned
Sessions Judge (FAC), Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC and ST
(POA) Act, Salem, in Crl.M.P.No.323 of 2026 dated 21.08.2026,
dismissing the appellant’s bail application filed in Crime No.327 of 2026
registered for the offences under Sections 498A of IPC, 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va)
of SC and ST (PoA) Act, 1989.
__________
Page2 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant/A1 and the de-
facto complainant was married on 14.06.2019, pursuant to a romantic
relationship; that a male child was born on 13.04.2022; that thereafter, the
appellant had an illegal relationship with some other lady; that thereafter
a complaint was lodged by the de-facto complainant and an enquiry was
conducted; that during the enquiry, the appellant and his parents had
humiliated the de-facto complainant on account of her caste and had been
continuously harassing her and thus committed the aforesaid offences.
3. The Trial Court had dismissed the bail application on the ground
that the investigation is pending.
4(a). The learned counsel for the appellant/A1 submitted that the
allegations are an afterthought; that the allegations, at best, discloses a
matrimonial discord; that the parents of the appellant have also been
falsely implicated; and that in any case, since the final report has been
filed, the custody of the petitioner is not required and prayed for bail.
__________
Page3 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
(b) The learned counsel further submitted that by the order dated
16.09.2026, this Court had granted interim bail and directed the appellant
and the de-facto complainant to appear before the Mediation Centre
attached to the District Court, Salem; that the mediation failed; and that
the appellant was in custody for 40 days.
5. Though the notice has been served on the de-facto
complainant/third respondent, none entered appearance. Therefore, this
Court appointed Mr.P.Gowtham, as Legal Aid Counsel, to represent the
third respondent.
6. Mr.P.Gowtham, however, would submit that the de-facto
complainant was subjected to harassment in various ways; and would
fairly concede that the appellant was in custody for 40 days and the final
report has been filed.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1
and 2 submitted that though the appellant had submitted before this Court
that he was willing to live with the third respondent, he stated
__________
Page4 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
before the mediator that he was not willing to live with the third
respondent; and that the final report has been filed.
8. The allegations in the FIR disclose a matrimonial discord
between the appellant and the de-facto complainant. Admittedly, they got
married pursuant to a romantic relationship. The alleged occurrence is
said to have taken place in the years 2024 and 2025, and a complaint was
lodged in the year 2026. The final report has also been filed. Therefore,
this Court is of the view that the custody of the appellant/A1 is not
required for the purpose of the investigation and trial. Hence, this Court is
inclined to release the appellant on bail on the following conditions:
(i) The appellant shall execute 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 Sessions Judge (FAC),
Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC and ST
(POA) Act, Salem;
(ii) the appellant and the sureties shall affix their
photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the
surety bond and the trial Court may obtain a copy
of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book and
__________
Page5 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
mobile numbers to ensure their identity;
(iii) the appellant shall appear before the trial
Court on the first working day of every month and
on all hearings;
(iv) the respondent police is directed to ensure
that there is no threat to the life and safety of the
de-facto complainant. In the event of any threat,
appropriate steps are to be taken.
(v)the appellant shall not commit any offence of
similar nature;
(vi) the appellant shall not abscond either during
investigation or trial;
(vii)the appellant shall not tamper with evidence
or witness either during investigation or trial;
(viii)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the learned Sessions Judge/Trial Court is entitled
to take appropriate action against the appellant in
accordance with law as if the conditions have been
imposed and the appellants 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] ;
(ix)i f the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR
can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
__________
Page6 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
9. In view of the above, the impugned order, dated 21.08.2026 in
Crl.M.P.No.323 of 2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge (FAC),
Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC and ST (POA) Act, is set aside
and the Criminal Appeal is allowed.
10. The High Court Legal Services Committee shall pay the
scheduled fees to Mr.P.Gowtham, the learned Legal Aid Counsel for the
third respondent.
10-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Note: Issue order copy today.
dk
__________
Page7 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
Copy to:
1. The Sessions Judge (FAC),
Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC and ST (POA) Act.
Salem.
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Sankari Police Station,
Sankar Sub Division,
Salem District.
3. The Inspector of Police
Sankari Police Station,
Salem District.
4. The Central Jail,
Salem, Salem District.
5. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
__________
Page8 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )

2026:MHC:4481
CRL A No.1127 of 2026
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
dk
CRL A No. 1127 of 2026
10-11-2026
__________
Page9 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 04:51:18 pm )