Ponnusamy v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP NO.5034 of 2025

1. Ponnuswamy

2. Arjunan

3. Sudhakar Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Chithamur Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

(Crime No.276 of 2024).

Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.276 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Govarthan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, 1/6

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of BNS in Crime No.276 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, on account of financial dispute between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, the petitioners went to the defacto complainant's house and picked up a wordy quarrel; that thereafter abused and assaulted the defacto complainant and his family members using wooden logs. Hence, this case. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case; that the petitioners had never committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution; that the petitioners had lodged a complaint before the respondent police against the defacto complainant; that the petitioners were earlier granted anticipatory bail by the learned Principal District and 2/6

Session Judge, Chengalpattu vide order dated 09.12.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.3533 of 2024; that the petitioners could not comply with the condition imposed on them within the stipulated period; and that the petitioners are ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also undertake to appear and to co-operate for the investigation, and prayed for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instruction submitted that the injured persons were discharged from the hospital; that there is a case in counter; and that the investigation is pending, hence opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 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.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, 3/6

considering the nature of allegation against the petitioners, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side, the fact that there is a counter case, the injured persons were discharged from the hospital and since custodial interrogation of the petitioners 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 made ready, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyur on condition that the petitioners 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 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 4/6

or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[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 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 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 of B.N.S. 26.02.2025 stn 5/6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

stn To The Inspector of Police, Chithamur Police Station, Chengalpattu District (Crime No.276 of 2024).

Crl.O.P. No.5034 of 2025 26.02.2025 6/6