Mannavan v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-05-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHIL KUMAR CRL OP NO.15770 of 2025

1. Mannavan

2. Senthil

3. Asokan

4. Malarventhan

5. Mahendran

6. Prabakaran ... Petitioner(s)/ A1 to A6 Vs State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Mannargudi Town Police Station, Thiruvarur District.

(Crime No.209 of 2025). ... Respondent(s) 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 their arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.232 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. Pragadeesh Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ****** 1/6

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 329(4), 324(4), 351(3) of BNS and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 in Crime No.209 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant operates a restaurant at Mannargudi, following a customer complaint about the insect in the food, the petitioners created a scene in front of others; that thereby, abused and assaulted the defacto complainant, his wife and employees; that further they threatened to burn down the defacto complainant's shop. Hence, this case.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case; that the petitioners had never committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution; that while the petitioners questioned the defacto complainant regarding the quality of the food in his restaurant, 2/6

a wordy quarrel arose and a case is registered as counter case in Crime No.208 of 2025; and that the petitioners are ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also undertake to appear and to co-operate for the investigation, and sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instruction submitted that on account of a wordy quarrel, both the parties exchanged blows; that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and a case in counter has been registered; and that the investigation is pending, hence opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation against the petitioners, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side, the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and since custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 3/6

6.

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 Judicial Magistrate No.1, Mannargudi 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 shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; 4/6

[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 Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 22.05.2025 stn/ nsl 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 official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

5/6

N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.

stn/ nsl To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Mannargudi.

2. The Inspector of Police, B-1 Bazaar Police Station, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.232 of 2025).

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P. No.15770 of 2025 22.05.2025 6/6