(Prayer: The Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14 A (2) of SC/ST Act, 1989, to call for the records pertaining to the order in Crl.M.P.No.346 of 2026 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge (P.C.R), Madurai, dated 11.08.2026 and to set aside the same and enlarge the appellant/petitioner on bail in connection with the Crime No. 216 of 2026 on the file of the 2nd respondent police.)

1. This appeal is directed against the order declining bail passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, (P.C.R.), Madurai, in Crl.M.P.No.346 of 2026 in Crime No.216 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that on 12.07.2026, at about 10:30 p.m., during the village temple festival, the third respondent/de-fecto complainant and his relatives had consumed alcohol in a public place and were creating nuisance. Further, they misbehaved with the women present there. The appellant and other village elders advised them to behave properly and maintain peace. However, the third respondent, being in an intoxicated condition, abused the appellant in filthy language and attacked him. In the course of the said incident, the appellant only pushed the third respondent, due to which, he fell down and sustained injuries. The present compliant is an exaggerated one. Though the third respondent was already discharged from the Government Hospital, he has taken further treatment at a private hospital only to delay the grant of bail of the appellant. The appellant has been in incarceration for about 60 days. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellant prays for setting aside the order passed by the Trial Court and for grant of bail to the appellant.

3. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) has submitted that on 12.07.2026, during the village temple festival, the third respondent and his relatives were sitting near a tree. At that time, the appellant came there and abused the third respondent by referring to his caste name in filthy language and assaulted him with a cricket bat, causing him serious head injuries. Though the injured was discharged from the Government Hospital, they has continued his treatment in a private hospital. The investigation has been completed and the final report has been filed before the Trial Court. However, cognizance has not yet been taken. The appellant has two previous cases and, therefore, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) strongly opposed the grant of bail to the appellant.

4. Notice was issued to the third respondent, who is represented by the learned counsel. The learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that on 12.07.2026, the third respondent was sitting with his relatives near a tree. At that time, the appellant herein came and abused him in filthy language by referring to his caste name and assaulted him with a cricket bat, causing serious injuries, which have not yet healed. Therefore, he is continuing his treatment at a private hospital. If the appellant is released on bail, it would cause further intimidation to the injured and his family members. Therefore, the learned counsel for the third respondent strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner/appellant.

5. This court has given its thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions put forth by either side. On careful perusal of records, it is found that the appellant herein was arrested in connection with Crime No.216 of 2026 on 14.07.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989.

6. From the submission of the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side), it is found that the investigation has already been completed and the final report has been filed before the Trial Court. The appellant is the sole accused in the above crime number. The injured was already discharged from the Government Hospital and is presently taking treatment at a private hospital. Though the petitioner/appellant has two previous cases, he was on bail in those cases. The appellant has been in incarceration for about 60 days.

7. Considering the above all circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail. The Trial Court, without taking into consideration the aforesaid circumstances, has declined bail to the appellant. Therefore, this Court is inclined to set aside the order passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge (P.C.R.), Madurai in Crl.M.P.No. 346 of 2026 in Crime No.216 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

8. In the result, this Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge (P.C.R.), Madurai in Crl.M.P.No.346 of 2026 in Crime No.216 of 2026 is set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on bail.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed. The petitioner/appellant is ordered to be released on bail on the following conditions:-

                   (i) The petitioner/appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge,(P.C.R.), Madurai.

                   (ii) 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 to ensure their identity;

                   (iii) The appellant shall stay at Thoothukudi and report before the SIPCOT Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

(iv) On violation of any of the above conditions by the appellant, the respondent police shall move an application for cancellation of the bail.