Arjun v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.02.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Arjun ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, K1 Sembium Police Station, Chennai.
(Crime No.75 of 2025).
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.75 of 2025, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Thinesh For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam 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 Sections 331(4) and 305 of BNS in Crime No.75 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/5
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and committed robbery of Home Theatre, Drilling Machine and Steel Box. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false; and that in any case, custodial interrogation is not required and sought for anticipatory bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the stolen property has been recovered and that the petitioner has no bad antecedents. 5.Considering the nature of the allegation; the fact that the stolen property has been recovered, the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents, and since, custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
2/5
7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the 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 condition that:
[a]the petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., until further orders.
[c]the petitioner 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 3/5
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.
28.02.2025 Sma To
1. V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police, K1 Sembium Police Station, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
4/5
SUNDER MOHAN., J.
Sma 28.02.2025 5/5