Praveenraj v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Praveenraj .. Petitioner Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of police Nallipalayam Police Station Namakkal District.

Crime No.96 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. 96 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Kumaraguru 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 on 01.07.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 196(1)(a), 353(1)(b) of BNS, Act in Crime No. 96 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant, who is 1/6

working as Sub-Inspector at Cyber Crime Police Station, Namakkal District, is that on 13.05.2025, the defacto complainant was monitoring the social media's post via Namakkal Police social media account at that time, he noticed a post from the petitioner's account namely @ Sanghi Prince that on 25.04.2025, the petitioner tagged a post telecasted in Tamil news channel and posted as "48 hours has not been completed since the Islamic terrorists had killed the Hindus and within that, the bolts in the railway track in Tiruvallur District were dismantled in order to derail the train to kill Tamil people"Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner is in no way connected with the alleged offence, however, he is suffering incarceration from 01.07.2025. 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 submitted that the petitioner is a single accused and he was arrested on 01.07.2025. He submits that the petitioner, who belongs to a political party, in his twitter account, is alleged to have posted a derogatory message creating enmity between two religions. He 2/6

also submits that there are three previous cases pending against the petitioner which are similar in nature. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner has come forward to file an affidavit of undertaking assuring that the petitioner will not post any message that could affect the sentiments and equilibrium of the society particularly those that may hurt the feelings of the minority community.

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

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side, considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner and also taking into account the petitioner's willingness to file an undertaking affidavit, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

8. 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-I, Namakkal and on further conditions that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial 3/6

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 30 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioner is directed to file an undertaking affidavit at the time of executing the sureties before the concerned learned Magistrate.

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

[g] 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 4/6

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. 24.07.2025 nr 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. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Namakkal

2. The Inspector of police Nallipalayam Police Station Namakkal District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem..

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

nr 24.07.2025 6/6