Ravi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu, Represented By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-04-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN 1.K.Ravi, S/o.Karuppaiya, No.6, Nethaji Nagar 2nd street, Palanganatham, Madurai.
2.R.Ashwin, No.6, Nethaji Nagar 2nd street, Palanganatham, Madurai.
Petitioner(s) Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station, Salem District.
Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the BNS, 2023, to pass an order directing the petitioners to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.125 of 2025 on the file of the respondent/ police.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Dinesh M For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, in connection with a case in Crime No.125 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners received a sum of Rs.14,70,000/- from the de facto complainant on the promise of obtaining Government job in Indian Railways for his son, but, they neither obtained the job nor returned the money.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the allegations are false and the petitioners have not received the amount as aforesaid; that the alleged transactions took place in the year 2022; that in any case, the allegations are borne out by records and that the custodial interrogation
of the petitioners is not required; that the petitioners in order to show their bonafides are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in the trial court and sought anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that earlier the petitioners were called for enquiry and they did not keep up their promise to hand over Rs.5,00,000/- to the de facto complainant and objected the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that the petitioners have volunteered to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and since the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation,
this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners on certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.125 of 2025 before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Sankari, Salem District, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without prejudice to the right of the defence before the trial court, on such deposit and production of proof, 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sankari, Salem District, on condition that the petitioners 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 learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions 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 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 petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; and [f] if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
23-04-2025 nsd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes;
To 1.The Inspector of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station, Salem District.
2.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sankari, Salem District.
SUNDER MOHAN J.
nsd 23-04-2025