Ravichandhiran v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.4429 of 2025 Ravichandhiran .. Petitioner Vs.
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Attur Police Station, Salem District.
Cr.No.378 of 2024 .. Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 378 of 2024 pending on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Murugnanatham For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate(Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 5
ORDER
Though the earlier anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed on 18.12.2024 by my learned predecessor, Hon'ble Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira, this petition is listed before this Court pursuant to the orders passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.31787 of 2024 on 04.03.2025.
2. The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 109 of BNS, Act in Crime No.378 of 2024, seek anticipatory bail.
3. The case of the prosecution is that due to a wordy quarrel between the petitioner's group and the defacto complainant in the prison, the petitioner and other accused assaulted the defacto complainant and threatened him of dire consequences and forced him to drink 50 glasses of water, due to which, he was admitted in the hospital for treatment. Hence, the complaint.
Page No.2 of 5
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent; that he has been implicated in this case and since custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and prayed for anticipatory bail.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are five previous cases against the petitioner.
6. Admittedly, this is a second anticipatory bail Application. Earlier bail Application was dismissed by this Court on 18.12.2024 by making the following observations:
" 4. The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that the petitioner, along with other accused, tortured the defacto complaint and he was formerly arrested and PT warrant has been issued against this petitioner. He further submitted that there are previous cases pending as against the petitioner.
5. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegation and the fact that the petitioner has NDPS cases pending against him, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner."
Page No.3 of 5
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and there is no change in circumstances, after dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail Application, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail and accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
19.03.2025 Index : Yes / No rkp To 1.The Inspector of Police, Attur Police Station, Salem District.
2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
Page No.4 of 5
SUNDER MOHAN , J.
rkp Crl.O.P.No.4429 of 2025 19.03.2025 Page No.5 of 5