Vijayakumar v. The State Rep By

SUNDER MOHAN.

J., This matter is posted today before this Court under the caption 'For Being Mentioned' at the instance of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that on 22.04.2025, this Court had granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.11765 of 2025. However, in the order, the crime number is wrongly mentioned as 114 of 2025 instead of 144 of 2025. She further submitted that the offence is wrongly mentioned as Sections 296(b), 308(2), 308(3) and 351(3) of the BNS instead of Sections 296(b), 308(2), 308(3), 351(3) of BNS Act (Corresponding Section 294(b), 384, 385, 506 of IPC) and Section 3 & 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003. Thus, she prayed for suitable directions.

3. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Registry is directed to issue order copy afresh forthwith, by making necessary corrections in the order dated 22.04.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.11765 of 2025.

4. Further, time to furnish surety is extended by a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

10.06.2025 Issue order copy today Upload order copy forthwith dk

SUNDER MOHAN.

J., dk 10.06.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP NO. 11765 of 2025 Vijayakumar Petitioner Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Kannamangalam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.114 of 2025) 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. 114 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioner :

Mr.E Sathiyaraj 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 296(b), 308(2), 308(3) and 351(3) of the BNS, in Crime No.114 of 2025, on the file of the

respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant had received a loan amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the petitioner and he paid weekly interest to him; that so far as the de facto complainant had paid Rs.30,00,000/- as interest; that the petitioner further demanded Rs.10,00,000/- as interest.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false; that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; that he had demanded only lawful interest; that in order to avoid payment of the loan and interest amount, the de facto complainant has lodged the present complaint, that in a similar complaint, the petitioner was arrested and was released on bail on 05.04.2025 in Crime No.143 of 2025 and that in any case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and sought anticipatory bail.

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 confirmed the fact that the petitioner was arrested in a similar case in Crime No.143 of 2025 and was released on bail.

5.

Considering the aforesaid facts, the nature of allegations, the which are borne out by records, the petitioner was not arrested in this case, while he was in custody in another similar case and, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate, Arni, Tiruvannamalai District on condition that the petitioner 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, and on proof of payment of deposits, 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 respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., until further orders.

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[f] 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

.

22.04.2025 vca To:

1.

The The Inspector of Police, Kannamangalam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

2.

The Judicial Magistrate, Arni, Tiruvannamalai District.

3.

The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

vca CRL OP NO. 11765 of 2025 22.04.2025