Jagadeesh v. The State Rep. By, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.16816 of 2025 Jagadeesh ... Petitioner Vs.
State rep. by The Inspector of Police Ponneri Police Station, Tiruvallur District Crime No.199 of 2025.
... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Crime No.199 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent police. For petitioner :
Mr.P.K.Mohana Sundhar For Respondent :
Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS Act, 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.199 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
1/6
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had involved in the road rage offence against the defacto complainant and her husband near the Perikavanam railway gate. Hence, the complaint.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had fracture on his right hand and he was discharged from the hospital on 12.05.2025 and with bandage, his friends taken him out in a bike and the petitioner was seated in the middle of the bike and his friends committed the offence of road rage and hence the petitioner cannot be blamed for the act of his friends. He further submitted that A1 and A2 were already granted bail by the lower court in Crl.MP.No.574/2025 dated 23.05.2025 and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He is an innocent person and the petitioner is in no way connected with the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner along with his friends had involved in the offence of road rage. On questioning the same by the defacto complainant and her husband, they abused and assaulted the defacto 2/6
complainant and her husband in public and also threatened them due to which they sustained injuries and they were taken to the Hospital . The petitioner is not with any bandage on his hand and he has actively participated in the said offence and some cases of similar nature is filed against this petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on his executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, Tiruvallur District, and on further conditions that:
[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;
[b] the petitioner is directed to attend the Casualty Ward of the 3/6
Government Hospital, Tiruvallur everyday at 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., for a period of two weeks and the In-charge of the Hospital has to certify that the petitioner had been in the Hospital during the stipulated time and the respondent police is directed to monitor the same.
[c] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;
[d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;
[e] the petitioner 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;
[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
19.06.2025 4/6
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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, Tiruvallur District
2. The Inspector of Police Ponneri Police Station, Tiruvallur District
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
gv Crl.O.P.No.16816 of 2025 19.06.2025 6/6