Suriyakala Ravi v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.02.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.5333of 2025
1. Suriyakala Ravi
2. R.Paranthaman
3. D.Vishanth ... Petitioners
Versus
State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Veppankuppam Police Station, Vellore District.
... Respondent (Crime No.48 of 2025) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.48 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. For petitioners : Mr.S.Sathish 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), 1/5
115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.48 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are relatives ; that on the date of alleged occurrence, there was a wordy quarrel and the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant with hands.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are false; there is a counter case in Cr.No.47 of 2025 and in any case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that there was case and counter case.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.
6.
Considering the aforesaid facts nature of allegations, the fact that there is a case counter case and since this court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/5
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 Judicial Magistrate-III, Vellore District 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;
[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 3/5
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.
27.02.2025 Vv To
1. The Judicial Magistrate-III, Vellore District.
2. The Inspector of Police, Veppankuppam Police Station, Vellore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
4/5
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.5333 of 2025 27.02.2025 5/5