Madras HC Refuses To Cancel DMK Leader R. S. Bharathi's Interim Bail In Case Under SC/ST Act For Disrespectful Remarks Against Lower Caste Elevations To HC [Read Order]

The Madras High Court on Saturday refused to cancel the May 23 grant of interim bail by the Principal Sessions Court to DMK organising secretary R.S. Bharathi, also a Rajya Sabha member, who was arrested under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989.Bharathi, a well known leader, made disrespectful remarks on members of oppressed class stating that the appointment of Justice A.Varadharajan, who belongs to lower caste and other 7 or 8 appointments of lower caste judges to High Court were alms rendered by former Chief Minister before the gathering of more than 100 people. Justice M. Nirmal Kumar rejected the request of the Central Crime Branch of the state police to cancel the interim bail granted till May 31 considering that the family members of the accused are doctors and accordingly, if he is lodged in prison, there was risk of making the other inmates susceptible to COVID.The judge also allowed the plea of the MP in directing the Principal Sessions Court to consider grant of regular bail to him right on the day when he chooses to surrender before the court.The Single Bench expressed that the speech disrespects Justice A.Varadharajan who is held in high esteem by members of the schedule caste and scheduled tribe who is an inspiration to thousand of lawyers belonging to the lower caste. This speech was made by the petitioner to bring publicity for his leader. According to the accused, the members belonging to the oppressed class are being appointed to such a position not because of their merit but because of charity made by the political leaders and thus insulted and humiliated the S.C./S.T. People. This meeting was telecasted in most of the Television and online channels. The statements are deeply disrespectful which attracts the offences under Section 3 (u) and 3(v) of the atrocities Act, 1989. On complaint, the case came to be registered on13.03.2020 at 6.00 P.M. Thereafter due to the Covid 19 pandemic no substantial investigation was conducted despite time limit prescribed under S.C./S.T. Rules. Hence, the de-facto complainant moved the High Court, which by order dated 12.05.2020 directed the Investigating officer to complete the investigation and file charge sheet within a period of thirty days from the date of the order.In view of the order passed, the investigating officer who was constrained of time to complete the investigation expeditiously, as he was involved in the works relating to Covid 19, the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police transferred the investigation to the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Greater Chennai Police. The latter on 22.05.2020 at about 18:30 hours took up the case for further investigation. The investigating officer perused case diary and documents collected in the case examined the previous Investigating Officer found prima facie commission of offence by the accused and in the course of investigation he intended to examine the accused at his residence, proceeded to examine the accused. Since, the accused did not co-operate, the investigating officer arrested the accused on 23.05.2020 at about 5.40 hours at his residence for the purpose of investigation, for the reason, if the petitioner/accused is not arrested, he would commit offence further and the members of the oppressed community resorting to more number of agitations leading to law and order problem cannot be ruled out.The accused was brought to the Central Crime Branch on 23.05.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner was produced for remand before the Principal Sessions Judge/Special Judge who by order dated 23.05.2020 had granted interim bail to the petitioner till 31.05.2020 on the petitioner executing a personal bond for Rs. 10,000/- and directed the petitioner to surrender before the Court on 01.06.2020.Before the arrest, the petitioner on 18.05.2020 had moved the High Court in a plea that came to be listed on 21.05.2020. The case, thereafter was adjourned to 27.05.2020 for serving notice to the de-facto complainant and for filing counter. Then to serve notice on the de-facto complainant as per Section 15-A(5) of the Act and for the State Public Prosecutor to file his counter the case was adjourned to 27.05.2020. In the meanwhile the petitioner was arrested on 23.05.2020. Thereafter the petitioner/accused was produced for remand before the Principal Sessions Judge/Special Judge at his residence since the said date viz., 23.05.2020 happens to be a Saturday/holiday. The Principal Sessions Judge/Special Judge after hearing arguments from both sides, granted interim bail as stated above. It is this order which came to be challenged before the High Court.Observations of the Court"The learned Judge after hearing either side considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case granted interim bail to the petitioner. The reasons assigned by the learned Judge are clear and it is not a cryptic order and the order is a reasoned one with...

Madras HC Refuses To Cancel DMK Leader R. S. Bharathi's Interim Bail In Case Under SC/ST Act For Disrespectful Remarks Against Lower Caste Elevations To HC [Read Order]

MEHAL JAIN

Tags