Victor v. The State Rep By Its The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

1. Victor

2. Abinash

3. Vignesh

4. Mohan

5. Ranjithkumar ... Petitioners Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Maduranthagam Police Station, Chengapattu (Cr.No.298 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.298 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner :

M/s.D.Padmanabhan For Respondent :

Mr.R.Vinoth Raja Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody 1/8

on 27.06.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1A) - ARMS ACT and Sections 20(b)(ii)(A), 8(c) - NDPS Act 132, 296(b), 351(3), 61(2) of BNS in Crime No.298 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the respondent police chased the accused vehicle, they found the possession of ganja products along with deadly weapons. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

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

2/8

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhavaram and on further conditions that: [a] 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;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall make himself available 3/8

for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;

[e] the petitioner 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;

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

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 25.07.2025 sma 4/8

Note :

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhavaram 2.The Inspector of Police, Maduranthagam Police Station, Chengapattu 3.The Central Puzhal Prison -II, Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/8

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

sma 25.07.2025 6/8

M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

This matter is posted today under the caption 'For being mentioned' at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner brought it to the notice of the Court that in the order, the satisfaction Court is wrongly mentioned as "Judicial Magistrate No.I, Court, Madhavaram" instead of "Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhuranthagam".

3. In view of the same, necessary corrections to be carried out in the order as follows:- i) In 4th line of Paragraph No.7 in Order dated 25.07.2025, the satisfaction Court "Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhavaram" shall be replaced with "Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhuranthagam". ii) Also, in the Copy To portion, in Serial No.1, the satisfaction Court "Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhavaram" shall be replaced with "Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madhuranthagam".

M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

7/8

shl

4. Registry is directed to issue fresh order copy by incorporating the above said changes.

30.07.2025 shl Note: Issue order copy on 30.07.2025.

8/8