Naveenraj v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 20.09.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL OP.No.23196 of 2024 1.Naveenraj 2.Arun ... Petitioners / Accused Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police, T-15, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Chennai District.

(Crime No.250 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER: - The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS) 2023, praying to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in Crime No.250 of 2024, on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Vignesh For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinothkumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/6

ORDER

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.08.2024 for the offences punishable under Section 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 309(4), 311 and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.250 of 2024, on the file of the respondent, seek bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is running a tea shop. On 22.08.2024 at about 10.30 p.m., the petitioners came to the defacto complainant's shop, had tea, and refused to pay for the same, when the defacto complainant asked money, the petitioners abused him in filthy language and beaten him and also rubbed Rs.1000/- from the cash box. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioners have been in custody for more than 21 days. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital. He would further submit that the 2/6

petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent would submit that the petitioners came to the defacto complainant's tea shop and had tea. After having tea, they refused to pay for it, when the defacto complainant questioned the same, the petitioners abused him in filthy language and attacked him and robbed Rs.1000/-. He would further submit that there is one previous case against the petitioners. He would also submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, he raised serious objection to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both side learned counsel and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering that already the injured was discharged from the hospital, considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and that though the petitioners are having one previous case, 3/6

they have been granted bail in that case and also taking into consideration the number of days of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the Petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute separate 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Shollinganallur, and on further conditions that; [b] the Petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the Petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[d] the Petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

[e] the Petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 4/6

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]; and [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

20.09.2024 ata To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Shollinganallur. 2.The Inspector of Police, T-15, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Chennai District.

3.Central Prison, Puzhal - II.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

P.DHANABAL ,J.

ata CRL.OP.No.23196 of 2024 20.09.2024 6/6