N.Imran Basha v. The State, Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.02.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.4497 of 2025 1.N.Imran Basha
2. S.Dhilshath ... Petitioners
Versus
The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, N-3, Muthialpet Police Station, Chennai District.
... Respondent Crime No.24 of 2025.
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.24 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For petitioners : Mr.R.Chakkaravarthy For Respondent : Mr.S.Balaji, 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 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS 2023 in Crime No.24 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
1/5
2. The case of the prosecution is that on account of prior enmity, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant and abused him in filthy language.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are false; and that in any case, custodial interrogation is not required and sought for anticipatory bail for the petitioners. 4.
The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that injured has been discharged from the hospital and that the petitioners have no bad antecedents.
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. 6.
Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, the petitioner has no bad 2/5
antecedents and since, custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with 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 on which the order copy is made ready, before the XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties 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.
[b]the petitioners shall report before the respondent police station daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
3/5
[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 are 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 BNS.
20.02.2025 Vv To
1. The XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police, N-3, Muthialpet Police Station, Chennai District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
4/5
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.4497 of 2025 20.02.2025 5/5