Mr. B. Saran Raj, v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN B.Saran Raj ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, E-3, Teynampet Police Station, Chennai.
(Crime No.237 of 2023) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.237 of 2023 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : M/s.Ramya Shrinivas For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 336, 392, 397 & 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.237 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. Page No.1 of 4
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused had restrained the de facto complainant while he was returning home, abused him in filthy language and snatched a sum of Rs.2400/- from him at knife point.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the case is of the year 2023 and there is no progress in the case. He further submitted that even the name of the petitioner does not find place in the First Information Report and further, co accused have been enlarged on bail. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegation and also taking note of the fact that the case is pending from the year 2023, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days Page No.2 of 4
from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties (out of which, one of the sureties should be the blood related surety) 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 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 interrogation;
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond during 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 Page No.3 of 4
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.
ham 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.
23.06.2025 ham To
1. The XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet.
2. The Inspector of Police, E-3, Teynampet Police Station, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page No.4 of 4