Arjunan v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-02-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP NO. 3700 of 2025 1.Arjunan 2.Latha 3.Prasanth @ Hariprasanth 4.Veerammal @ Kuppammal Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Sendamangalam Police Station, Namakkal District. (Crime No.33 of 2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.Parameswaran For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.33 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
Page No.1 of 5
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, with regard to family dispute, the petitioners along with other accused persons attacked the defacto complainant with a wooden log, causing injuries to the defacto complainant on the right leg and all over the body. Hence the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that due to family dispute, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case; there is no specific overt act against these petitioners; and that the custodial interrogation is not required in this case and hence prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions, submitted that the accused/A1 was arrested and released on bail.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
Page No.2 of 5
6. Considering the nature of allegations, there is no specific overt act against the petitioners, 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 on certain conditions.
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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sendamangalam, on condition that each petitioner 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 conditions 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. Page No.3 of 5
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner 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 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
24.02.2025 drl To
1. The Inspector of Police, Sendamangalam Police Station, Namakkal District.
2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
Page No.4 of 5
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
drl 24.02.2025 Page No.5 of 5