Murugan Alias Ayyappan v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1.Murugan @ Ayyappan 2.Ganapathy 3.Sudhakar 4.Rak @ Raghavan 5.Vishnu 6.Seetharaman ... Petitioners Vs State by Inspector of Police, Kottakuppam Police Station, Villupuram District.

(Crime No.166 of 2025).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent Police concerned in Crime No.166 of 2025 on the file of Inspector of Police, Kottakuppam Police Station, Villupuram District or on their appearance before the concern Court. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Sasikumar Page No.1 of 6

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 Sections 191(2), 296(B), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.166 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 07.06.2025 at about 06.30 p.m., when the defacto complainant had gone to Aurovile guest house to meet his brother, at that time near Sarukupalayam Kotaimedu, the 1st petitioner came in his two wheeler in rash and negligent manner and dashed the two wheeler of defacto complainant and also abused him with filthy language. The defacto complainant called his brother through mobile phone, informed the incident and asked to come to the scene. When the petitioner's came to the scene, suddenly all petitioners started attacking the defacto complainant using iron pipe and also threatened him with dire consequences. On the intervention of the public, the accused fled the scene and the injured persons admitted in Government Hospital, Puducherry. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners are Page No.2 of 6

innocent persons and they have nothing to do with the alleged offences. He further submits that the defacto complainant is the person who had driven his two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two wheeler of the 1st petitioner and also scolded the 1st petitioner with filthy language. He further submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 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 due to such incident, the defacto complainant suffered injuries and admitted in Government Hospital, Puducherry as outpatient and now discharged from the hospital.

5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and injured discharged from the hospital, 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 Page No.3 of 6

event of arrest or on their appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vanur 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 said Magistrate, on further condition that:

[a] if the petitioners fail 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 the identify proofs to ensure their identity; [c]the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, 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 themselves available for interrogation by a Police officer as and when required;

[f] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being Page No.4 of 6

identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, they shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[g] the petitioners 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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.

26.06.2025 vv2 To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Vanur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kottakuppam Police Station, Villupuram District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

Page No.5 of 6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

vv2 26.06.2025 Page No.6 of 6