VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2025 › High Court of Madras

Sanjaykannan v. The State Rep By, the Deputy Superintendent of Police,

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
11 November 2025
Bench
S Justice T.V.Thamilselviauthor
Case no.
CRL A 1628/2025

Follow Madras High CourtFollow S Justice T.V.Thamilselvi

Judgment

JUDGMENT This criminal appeal is filed to set aside the order passed in bail petition in C.M.P.No.1871 of 2025 dated 26.09.2025 on the file of Special Court for Trial of Cases Under SC/St ( POA) Act, Kancheepuram and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.321 of 2025 on the file of the second respondent police and pass orders.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased and the accused are residing in the same area and the accused fell in love with the deceased and had sexual relationship with her on many occasions. It is alleged that the deceased became pregnant and when the same was informed to the accused he replied that only if the deceased aborts the foetus, he will marry her. Due to which the deceased committed suicide by hanging. Hence a complaint was registered by the police and the same was taken on file by the Special Court for Trial of Cases Under SC/St ( POA) Act, Kancheepuram in C.M.P.No.1871 of 2025 and the same was dismissed on 26.09.2025. Challenging the same the petitioner has filed the present petition.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the panchayat was held on 04.09.2025 and after the panchayat the petitioner's family accepted to arrange marriage between the petitioner and the deceased. Thereafter, on 09.09.2025 only the deceased has committed suicide by hanging. Hence, prays to allow this petition.

¶4The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent submitted that she is a collie and she had two daughters and the deceased is the elder daughter. He further submitted that in the panchayat the petitioner's family members assured that the petitioner will marry the victim girl, but the petitioner failed to do so, due to which her daughter committed suicide by hanging. Hence, prays to dismiss this petition.

¶5The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 16.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 108 of BNS r/w 3(2) (v) (SC/ST

(POA) Act and further submitted that investigation is still pending. He opposed to allow this petition on the ground that the offence is grave in nature and prays to dismiss this petition.

¶6Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶7On a perusal of records it is seen admittedly the deceased belong to schedule case and she was aged 18 years. On going through the F.I.R it apparently exhibits that the offence under POCSO Act also made out before 2 years from the date of the death of the victim. It is pertinent to note that the deceased belongs to Scheduled case and her father predeceased her. The learned Judge has also ordered a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as interim compensation to the mother of the deceased.

¶8In the impugned order the learned Judge has also made an observation that the materials support the severity of the situation. There is every possibilities of the petitioner to abscond and to tamper the witnesses particularly, the defacto complainant who lost her husband and her daughter and dismissed the petitioner. This Court is of the view that the observation made by the learned Judge needs no interference and the same is confirmed.

9.Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed and the order passed in C.M.P.No.1871 of 2025 on 26.09.2025 on the file of Special Court for Trial of Cases Under SC/St ( POA) Act, Kancheepuram is confirmed.

11.11.2025 To

¶1The Special Court for Trial of Cases Under SC/St ( POA) Act, Kancheepuram

¶2The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District.

¶3The Inspector of Police Suguvar Chatharam, Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

¶4The Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. T.V.THAMILSELVI

,J.

smn Crl.A.No.1628 of 2025

11.11.2025

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.A.No.1628 of 2025 Sanjaykannan .. Appellant Vs. State rep by 1. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District. 2. The Inspector of Police Sunguvar Chatharam, Police Station, Kancheepuram District ( Cr.No.321 of 2025) 3. Jothilakshmi ..... Respondents Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed Under Section 14-A of S.C.S..T ( Prevention of Atrocities Amendment Act, 2015 r/w 415(2) of BNSS) to set aside the order passed in bail petition in C.M.P.No.1871 of 2025 dated 26.09.2025 on the file of Special Court for Trial of Cases Under Sc/St ( POA) Act, Kancheepuram and enlarge the appellant on bail in Crime No.321 of 2025 on the file of the second respondent police and pass orders. For Appellant : Mr. B. Manoharan For Respondents 1 &2 :Mr.V.Meganathan, Government Advocate For Respondent-3 : Ms.T.Gnanabanu

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.