K.Narendra v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-06-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. K.Narendra 2.S.Pavan Kumar Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Thiruttani Police Station, Thiruvallur District. Cr.No.253/2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Cr.No.253/2025 on the file of respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.D.Ilayaraja For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Vinoth Raja GA (crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 275, 276, 123 of BNS (Sections 273, 274 & 328 of IPC) read with Section 6(1) of COTP Act in Crime No.253 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2 The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, the respondent conducted a raid on the date of occurrence, during which, they found the petitioner and other accused with illegal possession of banned tobacco products worth about Rs.50,000/-. Hence, the 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. However on instruction, he would further submit that without prejudice to their defence, the petitioners are prepared to deposit considerable amount to any charitable Organization or Association. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that there are five accused in this case and the contraband was seized from the accused. The first, second and fifth accused were arrested and subsequently the second accused alone released on bail. The petitioners are arrayed as third and fourth accused and the fourth accused is having one previous case pending against him. The learned counsel vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides, nature of the allegations and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required, 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 Judicial Magistrate, Thiruttani on condition that each of 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 learned Magistrate concerned, and on proof of payment of deposits, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] The petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.

50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) (Non refundable) towards the account of SRI RAMACHANDRA INSTITUTE OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, Current Account maintained at Indian Bank, SRU Branch, Porur, Chennai-600 116, bearing Current Account No.471533180, IFSC Code No.

[b]if the petitioners fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[c] 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 any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

[d] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required;

[e] 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; [f] the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police office as and when required; [g]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; [h] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[i] 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];

[j] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

12-06-2025 jai Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Inspector of Police, Thiruttani Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Thiruttani.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jai CRL OP No. 16566 of 12-06-2025