Palani v. The State Rep. By Its Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR PALANI Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by its Inspector of Police Chetpet Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District Crime No. 186 /2025 Respondent PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 186 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police station. For Petitioner:
Mr.E.Sathiyaraj Elangovan For Respondent:
Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS Act (Corresponding Section 294(b), 323, 324, 506 of IPC) in Crime No.186 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 28.05.2025, at about 4.30 pm, the defacto complainant's husband, Prakash, who was working as a roadside sapling planter at Vandavasi bypass road, was allegedly abused and attacked by A1 and A2 with iron road while he was gardening, resulting in injuries. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner is innocent; that he has been falsely implicated in this case; and that in any case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the injured was discharged from the hospital.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
6.Considering the nature of dispute; that the injured was discharged from the hospital and the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions: (a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his/her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Polur, Thiruvannamalai District 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 said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent everyday at 10:30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;
[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during
investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner 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 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 BNS.
17-06-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.The Inspector of Police Chetpet Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Polur, Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Madras.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.
gbi CRL OP No. 17195 of 17-06-2025