IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT CHENNAI Present: Thiru R. Selvakumar, B.A., M.L., Principal Sessions Judge Wednesday, the 22nd day of September, 2021 Crl.M.P.Nos.15850 and 16371/2021 in CCBI Crime No.32/2021 Sam Abisheik .. Petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.15850/2021 /Accused Tamilselvi @ Meera Mithun .. Petitioner in bail granted

IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT CHENNAI
Present: Thiru R. Selvakumar, B.A., M.L.,
Principal Sessions Judge
Wednesday, the 22nd day of September, 2021
Crl.M.P.Nos.15850 and 16371/2021
in
CCBI Crime No.32/2021
Sam Abisheik .. Petitioner in
Crl.M.P.No.15850/2021 /Accused
Tamilselvi @ Meera Mithun .. Petitioner in
Crl.M.P.No.16371/2021 /Accused
Vs.
State Rep. by
The Inspector of Police,
Central Crime Branch1,
Vepery,
Chennai. ..Respondent/Complainant.
This petition is coming on this day before me for hearing, upon hearing the counsel
for the petitioner M/s.M.Vijayakumar, R.R.Mohana Raja and M.S.Arul Mani, Counsel for
the petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.15850/2021 and M/s.R.Chellamuthu, O.V.Krishnan, B.Balaji
and D.Sugumar, Counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.16371/2021 and SPP for
respondent, this Court delivered the following :
ORDER
1. The petitioners, who were arrested on 15.8.2021 for the offences punishable
under Section 153, 153A(1)(a), 505(1)(b), 505(2) of IPC r/w Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)
(u) of SC & ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 in Crime No.32/2021 on the file of the
respondent police, seek bail.
2. The counsel for the petitioners , Defacto complainant and the SPP were heard.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sam Abisheik submits that he has been
converted into Christianity. He is originally belonged to scheduled caste. The stigma
attached to the community remains the same. His parents are also scheduled caste. Further,
he is in custody for more than a month. There is no specific act by the petitioner to attract
the penal provisions. He just accompanied the coaccused. He had not uttered any words
against anybody and prays for bail.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner Tamilselvi @ Meera Mithun submits that
the alleged act committed by the petitioner is not with any intention or in order to create
enmity between two castes. She is a cine actress. She was mentally disturbed by the
activities of some of the persons in the cine field. Further, she is in custody for five weeks.
The provision underwhich she has been charged are simple in nature may be punishable
with six months imprisonment. Investigation is almost over and prays for bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned Special Public Prosecutor and the counsel for
defacto Complainant submits that the petitioners acted in a way to insult the entire
scheduled caste people and seriously objects granting bail.
6. As per the prosecution case, the accused released the video footage in the social
media containing speeches of Meera Mithun, insulting the entire scheduled caste
community. On perusal of the records, though there was some words uttered by the 1st
petitioner Tamilselvi @ Meera Mithun, the other petitioner also accompanied as a coactor.
Anyhow, they were in custody for nearly five weeks. Penal provisions cannot be invoked at
the time of bail. It can be proved by the prosecution during the trial. Since they are in
custody for five weeks and the fact that to err is human nature, this court is inclined to grant
bail.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a
bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/ each (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a
likesum to the satisfaction of this court and on further condition that
(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb impression in the
surety bond and submit a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their
identity.
(b) the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m.
until further orders.
(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during
investigation or trial.
(d) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
(e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the Trial Court is entitled to take
appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have
been imposed and the petitioners 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].
(f) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under
Section 229A IPC.
Delivered by me today.
Principal Sessions Judge.
Copy to :
1. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com