Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Madras High Court: In a criminal appeal filed under Section 14A(2) Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, challenging the trial court’s order of bail dismissal in Kavin Honour Killing case, a single-judge bench of K. Murali Shankar, J., upheld the trial court’s order and refused to grant bail.
In the instant matter, the prosecution case is that the deceased, belonging to Hindu Devendra Kula Vellalar community and appellant-accused 2’s daughter were friends from school days, and later their relationship developed into love.
On 27.07.2025, the deceased and his family visited appellant’s daughter for medical consultation. At the clinic, accused 1 (appellant’s son) allegedly asked the deceased to accompany him on a motorcycle, saying his parents wished to meet him. A short while later, the complainant saw accused 1 and the deceased together; accused 1 abused the deceased using caste name, took a sickle, and indiscriminately gave blows, causing 19 cut injuries, killing him brutally. The prosecution asserted that the murder is a clear case of honour killing due to inter-caste relationship between families of different communities
The present appeal filed challenging the order dated 29-10-2025, by which the II Additional District & Sessions Court (PCR), Tirunelveli dismissed the appellant’s bail petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 BNSS).
The Court noted that evidence from Head Constable indicated that the appellant was present at the scene. It was noted the filing of chargesheet alone does not entitle bail in such a brutal murder case. It was noted that the accused 3, also a Sub-Inspector and mother of accused 1, is still absconding, suggesting obstruction concerns.
The Court strongly condemned honour killings and noted that the Supreme Court in numerous cases had held that honour killings are the “most drastic and draconian act”, “a blight on Indian society”, an outrage on humanity and “the most dishonorable act known.” The Court relied on S. Yuvaraj v. State, where the Supreme Court held that in honour killing cases, the principle of “bail not jail does not apply” and instead “it should be jail and jail”. The Court noted that such crimes involve premeditation, violation of constitutional freedoms, and enforcement of regressive social norms, therefore courts must apply strict scrutiny to prevent intimidation or tampering.
Given the appellant’s police background and allegations of influencing investigation, the Court held that releasing him would pose a serious threat to witnesses and the integrity of further investigation.
The Court held that the trial court’s order dismissing the bail plea is perfectly in order and cannot be faulted with. Accordingly, the Court upheld the trial court’s order and dimsidded the criminal appeal.
[Saravanan v. State of T.N., 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 11661]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Mr. N. Anantha Padmanabhan, Senior Counsel for M/s. APN Law Associates, Counsel for the Appellant
Mr. B. Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate, Counsel for the Respondent No. 1
Mr. B. Mohan, Counsel for the Respondent No. 2