Thiruppathi vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Court
Madras High Court

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.RAMESH
CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012514242026}
1. Thiruppathi
S/o Rajendiran,
No.548, North Street,
Karikkuppam,
Kothattai, Parangipettai,
Cuddalore District - 608 501.
2. Makkan @ Rajadurai
S/o Pichai,
No.533, North Street,
Karikkuppam,
Kothattai, Parangipettai,
Cuddalore District- 608 501.
3. Thirunavukarasu
S/o Manmadam,
No.116, South Street,
Ariyakoshti, Parangipettai,
Cuddalore District- 608 501.
..Appellants
Vs
1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Chidambaram Police Division,
Cuddalore District.
2. Station House Officer,
Parangipettai Police Station,
Cuddalore District.
Crime No. 229 of 2026
3. Sivanandam
No.915, Amman Koil Street,
Karikuppam,
C.Puthupettai Post,
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
Bhuvanagiri Taluk,
Cuddalore District- 608 501.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, r/w 489 of
Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records and set aside the dismissal order dated
12-10-2026 passed by the learned Special Court for Trial of Cases under SC/ST
(POA) Act, Cuddalore, in Crl.M.P.NO.197 of 2026 and enlarge the Appellants
on bail in Crime No.229 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.
For Appellant(s): Mr.G.Pugazhenthi
For Respondents-1 & 2: Ms.R.S.Indira
Additional Public Prosecutor
Assisted by
Mr.M.Arul Raj
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated
12.10.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.197 of 2026 on the file of the learned Sessions
Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases under the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Cuddalore and to enlarge the
appellants on bail.
2. The appellants/Accused in Crime No.229 of 2026 were charged for
offence under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 351(2), 192, 196 of BNS r/w
__________
Page2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (PoA) Act. Pursuant to the
directions of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.28232 of 2026, the appellants were
surrendered before the Trial Court on 12.10.2026. Thereafter, they filed a bail
application before the Trial Court in Crl.M.P.No.197 of 2026. The learned
Sessions Judge, Special Court for Trial of Cases under the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Cuddalore, by the
order dated 12.10.2026, dismissed the bail application, against which, the
present appeal is filed.
3.Though notice has been ordered and served to the de facto complainant
through police and also privately, there is no appearance or representation for
the de facto complainant.
4.The case of the prosecution is that on 14.09.2026, the general public of
the appellants’ village and the members of the village panchayat took the
Pillaiyar idol to Tahikkal, where they engaged in a road protest. The police
officials intervened and pacified the crowd. Thereafter, the Pillaiyar idol was
taken through the Karikuppam Public Road under police protection. The
specific allegation against the appellants is that on the date of the occurrence,
the appellants alleged to have insulted the de facto complainant using his caste
name and subsequently assaulted and intimidated the school-going children of
the village.
__________
Page3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
5.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellants are
innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the above case due to
personal enmity between the parties. He further submitted that the appellants are
ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and
hence, prayed for grant of bail.
6.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents
1 and 2 submitted that in this case, investigation is pending and hence, opposed
for granting bail to the appellants.
7.Considering the nature of allegations and the period of incarceration
undergone by the appellants, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
appellants.
8. Accordingly, the appellants are ordered to be released on bail subject to
the following conditions;
(a) The appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two sureties,
each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Court for Trial
of Cases under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Cuddalore;
__________
Page4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
(b) T he sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb
Impression in the surety bond and the learned Judge may obtain a
copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their
identity;
(c) the appellants shall appear before the respondent police,
daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks, thereafter as and
when required for interrogation;
(d) The appellant shall not give any inconvenience or trouble
knowingly or unknowingly to the third respondent, failing which,
the bail shall be cancelled without any further reference.
(e) the appellants shall not commit any offences of similar
nature;
(f) The appellant shall not abscond either during
investigation or trial;
(g) The appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness
either during investigation or trial;
(h) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned
Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the
appellant in accordance with law as if the conditions have been
imposed and the appellant released on bail by the learned
Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW
5560];
(i) i f the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be
registered under Section 229A IPC.
__________
Page5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 12.10.2026 made in
Crl.M.P.No.197 of 2026 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court
for Trial of Cases under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Cuddalore, is set aside and the
Criminal Appeal is allowed.
23-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
rsi/sli
To
1. The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Trial of Cases under the
SC/ST (POA) Act, Cuddalore.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Chidambaram Police Division,
Cuddalore District.
3. The Station House Officer,
Parangipettai Police Station,
Cuddalore District.
4. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
__________
Page6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )

CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
N.RAMESH, J.
rsi
CRL A No. 1310 of 2026
23-10-2026
__________
Page7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 07:54:30 pm )