(Common Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, r/w 415(2) of BNSS, 2023, to set aside the orders made in Crl.M.P.Nos.4579, 4634 and 4651 of 2025, on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, dated 10.11.2025 in Crime No.666 of 2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent by allowing the present appeals and enlarge them on bail.)

Common Judgment

1. These criminal appeals have been filed against the orders passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, dismissing the bail petitions filed by the appellants in Crl.M.P.Nos.4579, 4634 and 4651 of 2025 dated 10.11.2025 respectively.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appellants are arrayed as A1, A5 and A6 in Crl.A.Nos.1910, 1911 and 1872 of 2025 respectively in the FIR.

3. The gist of the allegation against the appellants is that all the accused conspired together and attacked the deceased, Manimaran, with the intention to cause his death; and that the accused had made attempts to screen the offence.

4. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellants, suspecting the deceased to have stolen certain articles of the Company in which the first accused is the Managing Director, had committed the aforesaid offence.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appellants are in custody from 10.10.2025; that a similarly placed accused/A2 was released on bail by this Court in Crl.A.No.1765 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025, on the condition that he shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- and permitting the legal heirs of the deceased, namely, his father, mother, wife and minor child, to withdraw the said amount; that the appellants may be released on bail considering the period of incarceration and considering the fact that there is only an omnibus and vague allegation implicating all the persons who run the Company and its employees.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the appellants/A1 and A5 were detained under TN Act 14 of 1982 and were released by the Advisory Board; that the appellants have committed a grave offence; that the investigation is still pending; and that there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, and hence prayed for dismissal of the applications.

7. The learned counsel for the de facto complainant, vehemently opposed the grant of bail stating that the victim was humiliated on account of his caste; that he was brutally attacked after being tied to a tree; that there was also an attempt to screen the offence by removing his identification marks and changing his physical features; and considering all the above facts, the impugned orders that are under challenge are justified, and prayed for dismissal of the appeals.

8. Admittedly, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.A.No.1771 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025. The co-accused (A2), who is the son of A1 was directed to deposit Rs.10,00,000/-. The other accused, were directed to deposit Rs.50,000/- each to the credit of Crime No.666 of 2025 who were released. This Court had permitted the legal heirs of the deceased to withdraw the amounts deposited. The appellants prayed that they are also willing to deposit the amounts as was done in the earlier petitions filed by the co-accused. The first accused/appellant in Crl.A.No.1910 of 2025 offered to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- and the other accused offered to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- each. The appellants are in custody from 10.10.2025.

9. Considering all the above factors, this Court is inclined to release the appellants on bail.

10. Accordingly, the appellant/A1 in Crl.A.No.1910 of 2025 is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.666 of 2025 and the appellants/A5 and A6 in Crl.A.Nos.1911 and 1872 of 2025 are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the credit of Crime No.666 of 2025 as agreed upon by them while executing sureties before the Trial Court. On such deposit, the appellants are ordered to be released on bail on their execution of a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, and on further conditions that:

                     (i) the appellants/accused shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

                     (ii) the appellants/accused shall not commit any offences of similar nature;

                     (iiii) the appellants/accused shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

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

                     (v) 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];

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

11. On the deposit made by the appellants totalling Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Only), the father, mother, wife and minor child shall each be entitled to withdraw one-fourth of the said amount. The share of the minor shall be deposited in a Fixed Deposit until the minor attains majority. The appellants have no objection for the same. It is made clear that the deposit made by the appellants shall not be construed as admission of any fact and the same would not affect their rights in any manner as it has been voluntarily made.

12. With the above observations and directions, these criminal appeals are allowed.