G Sravanan v. The State Rep.By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 194 of 2025 G Sravanan S/o.Gnanamani, No.1/45, Masilamani Street, Vinayaga Nagar, Polichalur, Kancheepuram - 600074. and another Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.By Its The Inspector Of Police, T-4, Shankar Nagar Police Station, Shankar Nagar Chengalpattu District Crime No 709/2024 Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

M Dinesh G.Jeevitha P.Archana For Respondent(s):

Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 118(1) and 115(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.709 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek 1/6

anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, based on the information received from the Chromepet Government Hospital, a statement was obtained from the defacto complainant, wherein the complainant has stated that he went to make a reservation for worshiping in a Temple, at that time, wordy quarrel arose between him and the petitioners herein and they attacked the defacto complainant, due to which, he sustained injuries. Hence, this case. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the first petitioner is a person with disabilities and the second petitioner is relative to the first petitioner and on the day of alleged occurrence, there arose wordy quarrel between them and the defacto complainant, thereby both parties exchanged blows. He would further submit that a case in counter has been lodged against the defacto complainant in Crime No.708 of 2024. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any condition, that may be imposed by this Court and also to appear and co-operate for the investigation, therefore, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the 2/6

petitioners.

4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, stating that the petitioners had abused and physically assaulted the defacto complainant on account of wordy quarrel, arose between them in respect of making reservation in a temple for performing anointing. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous case and a case in counter has been lodged against the defacto complainant by the first petitioner herein, further the injured has been discharged from the hospital. 5.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR. 6.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and considering that the injured has been discharged and the fact that the petitioners have no previous case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

3/6

7.

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram, Chengalpattu District on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the first petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, every Saturday at 10:30a.m., until further orders, the second petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., until further orders.

4/6

[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 learned Magistrate/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 accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

08.01.2025 stn To

1. The State Rep.By Its The Inspector Of Police, T-4, Shankar Nagar Police Station, Shankar Nagar Chengalpattu District 5/6

Crime No 709/2024 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

stn Crl.O.P. No.194 of 2025 08.01.2025 6/6