B. Gopalsamy v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN 1.B.Gopalasamy 2.Meenakshi Petitioners Vs State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police SRMC Police Station, Chennai (Cr.No 14 of 2025) Respondent(s) Prayer:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to enlarge the petitioners / Accused on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 14 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioners(s): Mr.Praveen Kumar P For Respondent(s):Mr.S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1),351(3) of the BNS Act in Crime No. 14 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity between the petitioner's daughter and the de facto complainant, a wordy quarrel arose between them, as a result of which the latter was attacked and sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent; that they have been falsely implicated in this case; that there is a counter case and in any case custodial interogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation and hence, he prayed for anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the injured was discharged from hospital.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

2/4

6. Considering the submissions made on either side; nature of allegation; that the injured was discharged from 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 subject to the following conditions: (a) 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 Judicial Magistrate No.1, Poonamalle, Chennai on condition that the petitionerss shall execute a 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 said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police every day 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 SUNDER MOHAN, J.

vca 3/4

and the petitioners 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 of BNS.

03.03.2025 vca To 1.The Inspector Of Police SRMC Police Station, Chennai (Cr.No 14 of 2025)

2. The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Poonamalle, Chennai 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.

4/4