Sakila v. State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Sakila Petitioner Vs State Rep by, Inspector of Police, Thachampet Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. (Cr.No. 59 of 2025) Respondent PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in the hands of Respondent in Cr.No. 59 of 2025 pending investigation on the file Respondent Police.
For Petitioner:
Mr.Hariharan B For Respondent:
M/s. R. Vinoth Raja Ga (crl.
Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 118(1) and 109 of BNS @ Altered under Sections 103(2), 118(1), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b) of BNS in Crime No.59 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to the property dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant's husband, the petitioner along with other accused persons attacked the defacto complainant's husband by using black stone, shovel and knife. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent; that he has been falsely implicated in this case; that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and in any case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and sought anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that due to property dispute, there was a wordy
quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant's husband and also attacked each other, as a result of which, defacto complainant's husband sustained injuries. He further submitted that the co-accused have been arrested and also released on bail. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made on either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvannamalai on condition that 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 further condition that:
[a] 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for further interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 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];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
27-06-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.State Rep by, Inspector of Police, Thachampet Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. (Cr.No. 59 of 2025) 2.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvannamalai.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.
gbi CRL OP No. 17807 of 27-06-2025