Rajkumar v. The State Rep by the Deputy Superintendent of Police

J U D G M E N T This Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated

23.07.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2026 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri, and to enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶2The appellant, who is arrayed as A5 in Crime No.38 of 2026 registered for the offence under Section 103(1) of BNS r/w Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, was arrested on 06.05.2026. Thereafter, he filed a bail application before the trial Court in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2026. The learned Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri, by the order dated 23.07.2026, dismissed the same, against which, the present appeal is filed.

¶3Earlier, when the case was listed for hearing on 06.08.2026, finding that the appellant also facing charges under SC/ST Act cases, notice was ordered to the third respondent/victim/de facto complainant. After service of Page3 of 8 notice, on 10.08.2026, it was found that summons to the de facto complainant was served and the de facto complainant made strong objection for granting bail to the appellant and further she requested to appoint a legal aid counsel to argue the case. In view of the same, this Court appointed Ms.P.Suganthi, as Legal Aid Counsel for the third respondent.

¶4Today, the learned counsel for appellant, learned Government Advocate for first and second respondents and learned Legal Aid Counsel for third respondent are present.

¶5The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that, in respect of the co-accused in the very same Crime No.38 of 2026, this Court, vide orders dated

07.07.2026 in Crl.A.No.765 of 2026 and 27.07.2026 in Crl.A.No.876 of 2026, granted bail to them, subject to certain conditions. Hence, the present appeal has been filed seeking similar relief.

¶6The learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing for the third respondent strongly opposed the appellant's contention stating that Jayammal is aged above 50 years. The deceased never misbehaved with Jayammal. The appellant and the deceased were friends, they had some differences of opinion. The deceased was initially taken in a bike, questioned and assaulted. Thereafter, again he was taken in a bike to an isolated rocky area, where the deceased was assaulted on Page4 of 8 his head and chest, with weapon. All the accused with common intention committed murder, thereafter they left the body and escaped. Initially, a case was registered as suspicious death, later on the arrest and confession of the accused, the case unravelled. The de facto complainant, the mother of the deceased, has got strong objection for granting bail to the appellant.

¶7The learned Government Advocate submitted that initially, the case was registered for offence under Section 194(1) of BNSS, later, on suspicion, the accused were apprehended and on the confession of the accused, the case unravelled. In this case, six persons committed murder, the appellant is arrayed as A5. As regards this appellant, he used his hand and hit the deceased and also kicked him. The Post-mortem report confirms that the death is due to blunt injury on the head and chest. She further submitted that now in this case, investigation completed, charge sheet filed and the same is take on file in S.C.No.14 of 2026.

¶8Considering the submission made and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that the appellant not used any weapon. He used his hands to beat the deceased and also kicked him. It is also seen that in this case, the death was due to blunt injury on the head and chest. Further, in this case, now investigation completed and charge sheet filed. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant. Page5 of 8

¶9Accordingly, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail subject to the following conditions;

(a) the appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District;

(b) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(c) the appellant is directed to appear before the trial Court on all hearing dates without fail;

(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 appellant shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f) the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(g) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/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]; Page6 of 8

(h) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶10In view of the above, the impugned order dated 23.07.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2026 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri, is set aside and the Criminal Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

¶11This Court appreciates the efforts taken by Ms. P. Suganthi, the learned Legal Aid Counsel appointed by this Court for the third respondent, for her meticulous review of the case records with all necessary particulars and details. The Legal Services Authority concerned is directed to pay the prescribed remuneration to her. 17-08-2026 AT Note: Issue order copy on 17.08.2026 Page7 of 8 To

¶1The Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri.

¶2The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Palacode, Dharmapuri District.

¶3The Inspector of Police, Panchapalli Police station, Dharmapuri District.

¶4The Superintendent of Prison, District Jail, Dharmapuri.

¶5The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLoAoNo.o972oofo2026 M.NIRMALoKUMARoJ. AT CRLoAoNo.o972oofo2026 17-08-2026 Page8oofo8

Page1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Rajkumar S/o.Bairan, No.301, Naidu Street, Namandahalli, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Palacode, Dharmapuri district. 2. State by The Inspector of Police, Panchapalli Police station, Dharmapuri district. (Crime No. 38 of 2026) 3. Rani W/o.Karunagaran, Pattabi Nagar, Panjapalli Post, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri district. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, praying to set aside the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2026 dated 23.07.2026 and enlarge the appellant on bail concerned in Crime No.38 of 2026 on the filed of the 2nd respondent police. Page2 of 8 For Appellant(s): Ms. K. Deepika Sri for Mr.M.R. Elavarasan For Respondents-1 & 2: Mrs. Sharada Vivek, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Respondent-3 : Ms. P. Suganthi, Legal Aid Counsel