CRL A/1230/2026 of Gowtham Vs The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police on 8 October 2026

JUDGMENT

The appeal challenges the order passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai dismissing the bail application filed by the appellants, who were arrested on 18.09.2026, in Crime No.186 of 2026 registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(1), 304, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellants intercepted the defacto complainant on 17.09.2026 at about 04.30 p.m., abused him by uttering his caste name, assaulted him and took away his mobile phone.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appellants are in custody from 18.09.2026; that further incarceration is not required for the purpose of investigation; and submitted that in any case, the parties have arrived at a compromise.

4. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant would submit that the parties have since arrived at a compromise and also filed a joint compromise memo to that effect.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the investigation is pending.

6. This Court is not called upon to decide the validity of the compromise entered into between the parties.

7. Considering the fact that the appellants are in custody from 18.09.2026 and their further incarceration is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to release them on bail, on the following conditions;

(i) The appellants shall each execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai;

(ii) The appellants and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the trial Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book and mobile numbers to ensure their identity;

(iii) the appellants shall appear before the trial Court on all hearings;

(iv) the respondent police is directed to ensure that there is no threat to the life and safety of the de-facto complainant. In the event of any threat, appropriate steps to be taken.

(v) the appellants shall not commit any offences of similar nature;

(vi) the appellants shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

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

(viii) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Sessions Judge/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 Sessions Judge/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

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

8. In view of the above, the impugned order, dated 24.09.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.1554 of 2026 in Cr.No.186 of 2026 passed by the learned District & Sessions Court, Mayiladuthurai, is set aside and the Criminal Appeal is allowed. 08-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No TSG Note: Issue order copy on 08.10.2026.

SUNDER MOHAN, J. TSG To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District. Crime No.186/2026.

2. The Inspector of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District.

3. The District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai.

4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy.

5. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. CRL A No. 1230 of 2026 08-10-2026