K Dhanasekar v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04-07-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. K Dhanasekar 241, Othavadai Street, Sembedu Guruvarajapet Post, Arakkonam Taluk.

2.Suriya @ J Baskar son of Jayaraman 384, Palayakara Street, Periya kadambur Tiruttani Taluk Tiruvallur District-631211.

Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police Arakkonam Taluk Police station ArakKkonam Ranipet District Crime No. 231 of 2025 Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 231 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police and thereby render justice. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.D.Krishnamoorthy For Respondent(s):

Mr.V.Meganathan Government Advocate (crl. side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 7(1)(a) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1932 r/w.Section 25(1)(a) Arms Act 1959 in Crime No.231 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with accused No.1 were holding a knife and brickstone in their hands and scratched the knife in the road, thereby causing terror and fear to the public. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this

case. He further submitted that the accused No.1 has been arrested and released on bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioners. It is also submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides and taking note of the nature of the allegations and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are 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 his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Arakkonam, on condition that the petitioners 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[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 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;

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required;

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [e] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[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] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

04-07-2025 Jd To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Arakkonam.

2. The Inspector of Police, Arakkonam Taluk Police station, ArakKkonam Ranipet District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jd CRL OP No. 17281 of 04-07-2025