Vinodha v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP NO.17184 of 2025 1.Vinodha 2.Sivasagar Petitioners Vs The State Rep By The Inspector of Police Tiruthuraipoondi Police Station, Tiruvarur District.

(Crime No.240 of 2025) Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.240 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.Palanivel Nadimuthu For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 296 (b), 118 (1), 351 (3) of BNS Act and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Page No.1 of 6

Act, in Crime No.240 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioners and defactocomplainant are relatives. Due to land dispute, wordy quarrel arose between the petitioner and the defact-complainant, in which they attacked each other. Hence the case.

3.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent persons and they had been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Page No.2 of 6

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 nature of the allegations, the fact that the petitioners and the defacto-complainant are relatives and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is 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, Thiruthuraipoondi, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each 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:

Page No.3 of 6

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

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent as and when required for interrogation;

[d] 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;

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

[h] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the Page No.4 of 6

conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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];

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

17.06.2025 ep Page No.5 of 6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

ep To:

1.The Inspector of Police Tiruthuraipoondi Police Station, Tiruvarur District.

2.The Judicial Magistrate, Thiruthuraipoondi.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.

CRL OP NO.17184 of 2025 17.06.2025 Page No.6 of 6