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

Balaguru.K v. The Superintendent of Police

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
13 June 2025
Bench
P. Velmuruganauthor
Case no.
CRL OP 17021/2025

Follow Madras High CourtFollow P. Velmurugan

Judgment

O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusively trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Villupuram District to consider the bail application of the petitioner herein on the same day of his surrender pertaining to Crime No.72 of 2025, on the file of the second respondent-Police.

¶2Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and also perused the materials available on record.

¶3It is to be noted that Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "SC/ST Act"), is bar to file a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Therefore Anticipatory Bail is not maintainable for the offence under the SC/ST Act. Further Section 15A under Chapter IV-A was introduced by Act 1 of 2016 w.e.f. 26.01.2016, as per which, notice has to be sent to the victim, in respect of any proceedings and without giving notice, no proceedings shall be proceeded further. Further, the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be invoked automatically and the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly. When there is specific bar under the Special Act, this Court cannot ignore the intention of the Legislators and the purpose of enactment of the Special Act. If the petitioner application is directed to be considered on the same day without giving notice to the victim, the purpose of Section 15A(3)(5) of SC/ST Act would be defeated and the same would curtail the statutory right of the victim.

¶4Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to invoke Section 482 Cr.P.C., which would amount to ignoring the provisions of the Special Act. Therefore, this petition shall stand dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy in the manner known to law and the learned Special Judge is directed to exercise his/her discretionary power, after giving notice to the victim. The learned Special Judge/Magistrate is also directed to adhere the statutory provisions of Sections 18 and 15 A (3)(5) of SC/ST Act.

13.06.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms To

¶1The Sessions Judge,

Special Court for Exclusively trial of Cases

under SC/ST (POA) Act, Villupuram District

¶2The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District.

¶3The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Villupuram,

¶4The Public Prosecutor,

High Court, Madras. P.VELMURUGAN, J ms

13.06.2025

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 13.06.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Balaguru K. ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District. 2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Villupuram, Crime No.72 of 2025. 3. Manjula ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to direct the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusively trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, Villupuram District to accept the surrender of the petitioner and consider the petitioner's bail application and grant bail on the date of surrender itself in Crime No.72 of 2025, on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Villupuram District. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Chandrasekar For Respondents : Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 and R2

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.