Baskaran v. The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police,

CRL OP NO. 2244 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP NO. 2244 of 2025 1.BASKARAN 2.Chandrasekaran @ Chandarasekar Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Dusi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. (Crime.No. 20 of 2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Appaswamee VR For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Balaji, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The Petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126, 115(2), 308(2), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS r/w Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage & Loss) Act, 1992 in Crime No.20 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.01.2025, while the defacto complainant was travelling in a car, the petitioner intercepted the car with the intention to rob the money, abused him with filthy language and also tried to attack him with iron rod, and damaged the car, and caused loss to the tune of Rs.50,000/-. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent person and due to political enmity, they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that the 1st petitoner is the Ex-Panchayat President and the second petitioner is the brother of the first petitioner and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not necessary in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that it is a case and case in counter. He further submit that while the defacto complainant was driving a car with his collection amount, the petitioners intercepted the car with intention to rob the money and also damaged the car worth Rs.50,000/-; that the second petitioner has one previous case 2/6

pending against him. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the credit of Crime No.20 of 2025 before the Court concerned. Therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

7.Considering the nature of the allegations, there is a complaint by the petitioners against the defacto complainant, and since the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions (a) Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail 3/6

in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Cheyyar, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), each 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 said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m, until further orders.

(c) the petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.20 of 2025, within a period of two weeks from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall stands automatically cancelled.

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

4/6

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the Petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the Petitioner 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];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

05-02-2025 drl To

1. The State Rep by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Dusi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime.No. 20 of 2025) 5/6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

drl CRL OP NO. 2244 of 2025 05.02.2025 6/6