Latchimi Kandhan @ Lakshmikandhan v. The State Rep by the Deputy Superintendent of Police,

J U D G M E N T This Criminal Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated

13.07.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.914 of 2026 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai, dismissing the bail application filed by the appellants and seeking to set aside the same and enlarge the appellants on bail in connection with Crime No.279 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

¶2The appellants / accused in Crime No.279 of 2026 were arrested by the respondent police on 30.06.2026 for offences under Sections 189(2), 126(2), 296(b), 131, 351(3) of BNS r/w Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. They filed a bail application before the Special Court in Crl.M.P.No.914 of 2026, the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said dismissal, the present appeal has been filed. Page3 of 10

¶3The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, Parthiban, lodged a written complaint before the respondent police stating that on

29.06.2026 at about 9.30 p.m., while he had gone to take bath in the pond situated at Sathangudi, the appellants, along with others, wrongfully restrained and assaulted him, abused him in filthy language by intentionally calling his caste name in public view and criminally intimidated him with dire consequences. Pursuant thereto, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.279 of 2026 on 30.06.2026 for the offences under Section 126(2), 131, 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS r/w Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act and arrested the appellants.

3.1. Thereafter, the appellants filed a bail application before the District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai, which was dismissed on 13.07.2026, mainly on the ground of the seriousness of the allegations and the subsequent registration of Crime Nos.280 and 281 of 2026. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal has been filed.

¶4The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that on 29.06.2026, while the deceased Parthiban had gone to take bath in the pond at Sathangudi, the appellants, along with others, wrongfully restrained and assaulted him, abused him by calling his caste name and criminally intimidated him.

4.1. He further submitted that the appellants 1 and 2 are the father and Page4 of 10 uncle of the deceased girl, respectively and the deceased girl had been in a relationship with Parthiban. The appellants, being her family members, had only advised her not to continue the relationship with Parthiban. Their conduct was only that of parents advising their daughter and there was no intention to cause harm to Parthiban.

4.2. The learned counsel further submitted that the appellants have also lost their daughter, a yough budding star of the family. He further submitted that the first appellant is a JCB driver and with great difficulty, had availed financial assistance from the bank and private lenders, earning his livelihood through the JCB. His only daughter recently completed her schooling and joined St.Thresa's College. The parents of the deceased girl were nurturing fond hope that the girl would pursue her studies, become the first graduate in the family and bring respect to the family. When their daughter suddenly vanished from the world, they were in a state of shock and now confined in prison in connection with the above case.

4.3. The learned counsel further submitted that the appellants are in custody for 51 days, the post-mortem on both victims conducted and the post-mortem report records death was due to suicide by hanging. Now substantial part of the investigation completed. He further submitted that the first appellant is suffering from a leg injury and is a chronic diabetic patient and he has been advised to undergo immediate medical treatment, otherwise there is a likelihood of his leg being amputated. Page5 of 10

¶5The learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that, on the compliant lodged by the defacto complainant, a case was registered in Crime No.279 of 2026 for the offences under Sections 126(2), 131, 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS r/w Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. The appellants were arrested in connection with the said case.

5.1. She further submitted that the defacto complainant had specifically alleged that the appellants wrongfully restrained and assaulted him abused him by calling his caste name in public view and criminally intimidated him.

5.2. She further submitted that, subsequent to the occurrence, both the deceased persons had committed suicide and the situation in the locality had become tense. She further submitted that a major portion of the investigation has been completed.

¶6The learned counsel for the victim, Marimuthu, father of Parthiban, filed a typed set of papers and made strong objections, stating that the boy and the girl were in love with each other. On coming to know about the same, the appellants and others abused and threatened the said Parthiban and warned him when he went to the lake to fetch water. He was also abused in public by calling his caste name and was severely threatened. Though a complaint was lodged on

29.06.2026, the police failed to take any action. Fearing for his life, threat and humiliation, he had committed suicide. Only after Parthiban committed suicide, Page6 of 10 a case registered by giving an ante-time complaint and the police not acted swiftly. If appropriate action taken earlier, the subsequent act of committing suicide by both Parthiban and the minor girl and the consequential commotion and assault could have been avoided.

6.1. Since the boy belonged to a Scheduled Caste community, the police were lethargic and failed to take any action. For avoiding their responsibility, he would take appropriate action by submitting representation and also filing a direction petition to set right the course of investigation and to take action against the lethargic police officials, despite there being a clear procedure and rules contemplated under the SC/ST Act. Further, the SC/ST Act contains a special provision to take action against erring officials.

6.2. He fairly admitted that both the families had lost tow young budding teenagers and that the issue had escalated only due to the acts of the appellants. He further submitted that the boy's family members, who were arrested in Crime No.282 of 2026, were granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.20507 of 2026 and were directed to stay at Trichy and report before the Cantonment Police Station, Trichy, twice a day. Similar stringent conditions can be imposed. Further submitted that, if the appellants are permitted to enter the village, as there is a likelihood of breach of law and order.

¶7Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that both sides, namely, the appellants as well as the victim's family, have lost a Page7 of 10 young member of their respective families, due to which there have been abuse, assault and damages. It is seen that earlier, the boy was threatened and abused not to continue his relationship with the first appellant's daughter, who recently completed her 12th Standard and further joined college. It is further seen that the post-mortem is completed, the medical records collected and a substantial portion of the investigation progressed. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellants.

¶8Accordingly, the appellants are ordered to be released on bail subject to the following conditions;

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

(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) Since the first appellant is suffering from a leg injury and requires treatment, he shall appear before the 2nd respondent police every Monday at 10.30 a.m., for two weeks; The other appellants shall appear before the Cantonment Police Station, Trichy, at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 10 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) the appellants shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; Page8 of 10

(e) the appellants shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellants in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellants 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];

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

¶9In view of the above, the impugned order dated 13.07.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.914 of 2026 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai, is set aside and the Criminal Appeal is, accordingly, allowed. 20-08-2026 AT Note: Issue order copy on 20.08.2026 To

1.The District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai

¶2The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sirkazhi, Mayiladuthurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Poraiyar Police Station, Mayiladuthurai. Page9 of 10

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Cuddalore.

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page10 of 10

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. AT Crl. A. No. 1021 of 2026 20-08-2026

Page1 of 10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Crl. A. No. 1021 of 2026 1.Latchimi Kandhan @ Lakshmikandhan S/o. Pakkirisamy 2.Surya S/o. Pakkirisamy 3.Manimaran S/o. Ravichandran 4.Vasanthan S/o. Ravichandran 5.Vijayakumar S/o. Vengatesan .. Appellants Vs 1.The State Rep., by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sirkazhi, Mayiladuthurai District. 2.The State Rep., by, The Inspector of Police, Poraiyar Police Station, Mayiladuthurai. (Crime No. 279 of 2026) Parthipan (Died) S/o. Marimuthu ..Respondents Page2 of 10 Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A (2) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989, praying to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 13.07.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.914 of 2026 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge at Mayiladuthurai and to set aside the same and enlarge the appellants on bail in connection with the Crime No.279 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Appellants: Mr. U. Kathiravan For Respondents: Ms. Sharada Vivek, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 & R2 Mr. R. Thirumoorthy for Mr. Marimuthu