R Rajasekar v. The State, Rep, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.01.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDAR MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.2400 of 2025 R.Rajasekar ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Arakkonam Town Police Station, Ranipet District.

(Crime No.38 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.38 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Mr.MA. P. Thangavel For Respondent :

Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) of BNS 2023 and Section 3 of TN PPD Act in Crime No.38 of 2025 on the file of the 1/6

respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is a Member of the Town Hall Association and the defacto complainant is the Secretary of the said association. Due to tenancy dispute, with respect to a shop, on 06.01.2025 at about 7.00 PM, there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant, which quarrel escalated into violence. As a result, the petitioner damaged the CCTV setoff box and other articles worth about Rs.20,000/-. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent would submit that due to tenancy dispute, there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. As a result, the petitioner damaged the 2/6

CCTV setoff box and other articles worth about Rs.20,000/-. He would further submit that there are three previous cases pending as against the petitioner. Hence he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both side learned counsel and perused the materials available on record.

6.It is seen from the records that the previous cases registered against the petitioner were of the years 2012 and 2015. 7.Considering the nature of allegation; the fact that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 8.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy was made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Arakkonam, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for 3/6

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 said Magistrate, on further condition that:

[a] 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

4/6

31.01.2025 smv To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Arakkonam.

2.The Inspector of Police, Arakkonam Town Police Station, Ranipet District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

smv Crl.O.P.No.2400 of 2025 31.01.2025 6/6