Sekar v. State By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.05.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1.Sekar 2.Vediraj 3.Dhavamani 4.Ramesh ... Petitioners -vsThe State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.
(Crime No.99 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.99 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. For Petitioners :
Mr.S.Silambu Selvan 1/6
For Respondent :
Mr.V.Meganathan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ********
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 (294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) of IPC) in Crime No.99 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner are own brothers, regarding using of common well in their agricultural land there was a existing dispute between the defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner, another brother stands in support of the 1st petitioner, on 30.03.2025,the 1st petitioner had derived water from the common well and fetched water to his agricultural land. It was being objected by the defacto complainant and had a quarrel with the 1st petitioner and there is a wordy quarrel arose and assaulted each other. Hence this case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they 2/6
have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the case in counter and there is some civil dispute between the defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner and no previous case pending against the petitioners. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Thiruvannamalai, 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 condition that:
(a) if the petitioners fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled; 3/6
(b) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (c) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of 30 days;
(d) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(e) the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police office as and when required;
(f) the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;
(g) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; (h) 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 4/6
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]; (i) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.
16.05.2025 rna "Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code." To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Thiruvannamalai.
2.The Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
5/6
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
rna 16.05.2025 6/6