Venkatesh v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

1. Venkatesh

2. Thirunavukarasu

3. Shanmugavalli

4. Kasinathan 5.Mayavel @ Abimannan ... Petitioners Vs.

State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Andimadam Police Station, Ariyalur District (Crime No. 209 of of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 209 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioners : Mr.S.N.Subramani For Respondent : Mr. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 194(3) of of BNSS, 2023 in Crime No. 209 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

Page No.1 of 5

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a matrimonial dispute between the 1st petitioner and the defacto complainant's daughter. It is alleged in the FIR that 1st petitioner is the husband, 2nd petitioner is the brother-in-law, 3rd and 4th petitioners are parents-in law of the defacto complainant's daughter. It is further alleged in the FIR that the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant's daughter and also harassed her not to go to her parent's house. On 18.06.2025, the defacto complainant's daughter committed suicide by hanging. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions 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. He also submits that in this case, RDO enquiry is pending.

Page No.2 of 5

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 1st petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed in respect of 1st petitioner. However, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 to 5 with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners 2 to 5 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, Jayankondam on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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:

Page No.3 of 5

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners 2 to 5 shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30.a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond during during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 petitioners 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]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

14.07.2025 nr Page No.4 of 5

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.

nr To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Jayankondam

2. The Inspector of Police, Andimadam Police Station, Ariyalur District

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

14.07.2025.

Page No.5 of 5