Devaprabu @ Kullan v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Devaprabu @ Kullan No.2/115, Labour Street, Ayilam Village, Walajah Taluk, Ranipet District.
Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rathinagiri Police Station, Ranipet District.
Crime No. 147 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.147/2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Thirumoorthy D For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act, 1959 in Crime No.147 of 2025 on the file of respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on a secret information, the Village Administrative Officers of Ayilam Village, Walajah Taluk, Ranipet inspected the land comprised in Survey No.118 ini the said village and found the petitioner in possession of a country made gun without any valid licence. On verification, it was alleged that the said gun was used to hunt wild animals. Hence, this case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and objected for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that the petitioner had obtained the country made gun from the Narikuravar community people.
5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is 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, Arcot, on condition that the petitioner 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] the petitioner and 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for the period of eight weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness
either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
11-09-2025 ksa-2 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Arcot
2. The Inspector of Police, Rathinagiri Police Station, Ranipet District.
3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
ksa-2 CRL OP No. 22017 of 11-09-2025