K.Amsavalli v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN 1.
K.Amsavalli 2.
Ganga 3.
Kumarasamy 4.
Ramasamy 5.
Velmurugan petitioners Vs State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police Avinangudi Police Station, Cuddalore District.
(Cr.No. Not known) Respondent 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.Not known pending on the file of the respondent police.
For petitioners :
Mr.Vetrimani A For Respondent :
Mr.S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(1), 296(b), 115(2) and 351(2) of the BNS Act and Section 4 of the TNPHW Act, 2002 , on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.
The case of the prosecution is that due to a wordy quarrel, the petitioners assaulted the de facto complainant. 3.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are false; that the petitioners have no bad antecedents and that in any case, custodial interrogation is not required and sought for anticipatory bail to 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. He further produced a copy of the FIR. 2/6
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.
6.
Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, the petitioners have 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 petitionerss 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 Judicial Magistrate Titakudi on condition that the petitionerss 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:
3/6
[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 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 petitionerss 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 petitionerss in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court shimself 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.
06.03.2025 vca 4/6
To
1. The Inspector Of Police Avinangudi Police Station, Cuddalore District.
(Cr.No 787 of 2024)
2. The Judicial Magistrate Titakudi 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.
5/6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
vca 06.03.2025 6/6