Suriya v. State By The Sub Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN R. Suriya Petitioner Vs State Rep By, The Sub- Inspector Of Police T-9, Maraimalai Nagar Police Station, Chennai.
(Cr.No 411 of 2024) Respondent Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner / Accused on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 411 of 2024 pending on the file of the respondent police.
For petitioner :
M/s.R S Manoj Kumar For Respondent :
Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of the BNS Act in Crime No. 411 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6
2.
The case of the prosecution is that due to a wordy quarrel, the petitioners along with the other accused assaulted the de facto complainant and his son.
3.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent; that he has been falsely implicated in this case; that the co-accused were arrested and released on bail; that the petitoner has no bad antecedents and sought anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4.
The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the injured was discharged from the hospital and that the petitioner has no bad antecedents.
5.
Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the injured was discharged from the hospital, the petitioner has no bad 2/6
antecedents, the co-accused were arrested and released on bail and since, custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6.
Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate -II, Chengalpattu on condition that the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the 3/6
respondent police every day at 10:30 a.m., until further orders;
[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
28.03.2025 vca 4/6
To:
1.
The The Sub- Inspector Of Police T-9, Maraimalai Nagar Police Station, Chennai.
2.
The Judicial Magistrate -II, Chengalpattu.
3.
The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.
5/6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
vca 28.03.2025 6/6