M.Selvakumar vs The State ofTamilnadu rep by
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.KARTHIKEYAN
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011431722026}
1. M.Selvakumar
S/o. Mookan,
Komanapatti, Sathampaadi,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District- 624 401
2. C.Prabakaran
S/o. Chellam,
Komanapatti, Sathampaadi,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District - 624 401.
3. S.Gokul
S/o. Subiramani,
Komanapatti, Sathampaadi,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District - 624 401.
4. R.Ajay
S/o. Ravi,
Komanapatti, Sathampaadi,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District- 624 401.
..Appellant(s)
Vs
1. The State ofTamilnadu rep by
The Deputy superintendent of Police,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
2. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police,
Natham
Police station,
__________
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
(Crime No.589/2026)
3. M.Ashok
4.C.Kanagaraj
5.R.Boopathi Kannan
6.Manoj
7.M.Mayakannan
8.P.Priyadharshini
9.M.Chandra
10.Sindhuja Shri (Minor),
Represented by her father B.Siva
11.A.Parimala
..Respondent(s)
(R 4 to R 11 were impleaded vide order dated 16.10.2026)
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14 A(2) of the SC/ST
(POA) Amendment Act, 2015 to set aside the order passed in
Crl.M.P.No.268 of 2026 dated 30.09.2026 on the file of the Special Court
for Exclusive Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul and
enlarge the appellants 1 to 4/Accused Nos.3, 7, 9 and 10 on bail in
connection with Crime No.589 of 2026 on the file of the respondent
police.
For Appellant(s): Mr.S.Arunnithy
For Respondent(s): Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar (R1 & R2)
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)
__________
Page 2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
Mr.K.Pandiarajan
For victims
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the order declining to grant bail to
the appellants by the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases
under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul, in Crime No.589 of 2026.\
2.The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that, when the
Vinayakar idol was taken in procession in connection with the Vinayakar
Chathurthi festival, a quarrel erupted between two groups of people
belonging to Komanapatti, Natham Taluk. In this connection, the present
case was registered in Crime No.589 of 2026 for the offences punishable
under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and 79 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)
(2a)(C), 3(1)(y), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(2)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA)
Act. A counter-case was registered in Crime No.590 of 2026 against 22
accused for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 296(b), 191(2),
191(3), 119(2), 118(1), 351(2) and 79 of the BNS and Section 92(b) of
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
3.The learned counsel further submitted that, in the counter-case,
__________
Page 3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
22 persons were arrayed as accused, of whom four were arrested and the
others obtained anticipatory bail. The arrested persons were also
subsequently released on bail. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed that
the appellants be enlarged on bail.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted
that, based on the complaint lodged by the third respondent, the present
case came to be registered by the respondent police. There was a clash
between two groups belonging to different communities in connection
with the procession of the Ganesha idol during the Vinayakar Chathurthi
festival. In this connection, a case and a counter-case were registered. In
the counter-case, 22 persons were arrayed as accused, and all of them
were granted bail or anticipatory bail, as the case may be. In the present
case, 14 persons were arrayed as accused. Of them, ten persons
surrendered pursuant to the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)
No.22719 of 2026 and obtained bail from the trial Court. Therefore, the
learned Government Advocate strongly opposed the grant of bail to the
appellants.
5.Notice was issued to the victims, who appeared in person before
this Court today.
__________
Page 4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
6.The victims are represented by their learned counsel. The
learned counsel for the victims submitted that, during the Vinayakar
Chathurthi festival, when they took the Ganesha idol in procession, the
accused unlawfully assembled, attacked them with deadly weapons and
abused them in filthy language by referring to their caste names. The
learned counsel further submitted that, if the accused are released on bail,
they may issue further threats to the victims. Therefore, the learned
counsel strongly opposed the grant of bail to the appellants.
7.This Court has given its thoughtful consideration to the rival
submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side.
8.It is the case of the prosecution that, on 18.09.2026, at around
8.30 a.m., a procession of the Ganesha idol was taken out in Komanapatti
Village in connection with the Vinayakar Chathurthi festival. At that
time, a clash broke out between two groups of people belonging to the
said village, resulting in injuries to persons on both sides. In this
connection, Crime No.589 of 2026 was registered against the appellants,
while Crime No.590 of 2026 was registered against the members of the
other group.
__________
Page 5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
9.In the counter-case, all the accused were granted bail or
anticipatory bail, as the case may be. In the present case also, except for
the appellants, all the other accused surrendered pursuant to the order
passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.22719 of 2026 and obtained
bail from the trial Court. It is further seen that the injured persons have
already been discharged from the hospital and are physically present
before this Court.
10.Considering all the above circumstances, this Court is inclined
to allow this criminal appeal, subject to the imposition of stringent
conditions.
11.Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed, and the order
passed by the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under
the SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul, in Crl.M.P.No.268 of 2026, dated
30.09.2026, is hereby set aside. The appellants are ordered to be released
on bail, subject to the following conditions:
i. The appellants shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a like
sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of
__________
Page 6 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
Cases under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Dindigul.
ii. The appellants and their sureties shall submit copies of their
Aadhaar cards or any other identity cards issued by the Government as
proof of their residential addresses.
iii. The appellants shall file affidavits of undertaking before the
respondent police, undertaking that they will not involve themselves in
any criminal activity in the future.
iv. The appellants shall reside in Trichy and shall not enter the
village or contact the victims or the de facto complainant, either directly
or through electronic means, during the period of bail.
v. The appellants shall not contact the victims or their family
members, either directly or indirectly, with a view to influencing them to
withdraw the complaint.
vi. The appellants shall reside in Trichy and report before the
Inspector of Police, Malaikottai Police Station, Trichy, daily at 10.30
a.m., until further orders, except on days when their appearance is
__________
Page 7 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
required before the trial Court.
vii. In the event of any violation of the above conditions by the
appellants, the respondent police shall be at liberty to move an
application seeking cancellation of bail.
16-10-2026
(1/2)
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
PS
__________
Page 8 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
To
1.The Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA)
Act, Dindigul.
2.The Deputy superintendent of Police,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
3.The Inspector Of Police,
Natham Police station,
Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
4.The District Jail,
Dindigul.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 9 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
S.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
PS
CRL A(MD) No. 1224 of 2026
(1/2)
16-10-2026
__________
Page 10 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )