S. Selvaraj v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-04-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP No. 12199 of 2025 1.S.Selvaraj 2.L.Jothikanthan 3.G.Vadivelan 4.P.Gowtham 5.Logaa @ Loganayagi Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, P-2, Otteri Police Station, Chennai.
(Crime No.414 of 2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr.C.Srinivasan For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Balaji, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent in Crime No.414 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent.
ORDER
The petitioners/A2 to A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) & 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.414 of 2025, on the file of 1 / 4
the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners ( A2 to A5) are the friends of A1; that there was a family dispute between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant's friend one Mageshwari, due to which, on the date of occurrence, the petitioners along with other accused, abused him and attacked him with a iron rod causing injuries to him. Hence, the case
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the allegations are false; that the petitioners herein are the friends of A1 and due to family dispute, the defacto complainant has given a false complaint against them and in any case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required and sought for anticipatory bail.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal 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 the petitioners have no bad antecedents.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
2 / 4
6. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, 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 petitioners 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 the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners 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 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 1 to 4 shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m, until further orders; 3 / 4
SUNDER MONHAN, J.
drl that the 5th petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation; [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 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.
drl 23-04-2025 To
1. The Inspector of Police, P-2, Otteri Police Station, Chennai.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRL OP No. 12199 of 2025 4 / 4