Somasundaram @ Somu v. State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.22424 of 2025 Somasundaram @ Somu ... Petitioner/ A6 Vs The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Sooramangalam Police Station, Salem District.

(Crime No.432 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in the event of arrest in Crime No.432 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. A. Saranraj For Respondent(s) :

Mr. S. Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ******* 1/6

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 140(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 308(5) of BNS (Sections 364A, 342, 323, 324 and 386 of IPC) in Crime No.432 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.07.2025, the defacto complainant namely Lukaman Ansari, who is a Coolie by profession, lodged a complaint alleging that during his train journey from Patna to Ernakulam, he was approached by a stranger, who introduced himself as a representative of "Kumarasamy Private Limited", a manpower agency; that the agency promised him a commission of Rs.200/- per labour for arranging workers aged between 18-45 years; that believing the same, the defacto complainant introduced one Ramdev Pulla, who in turn arranged eight labourers and they arrived at Salem Railway Station on 26.07.2025; that thereafter, one Indirajith took the eight labourers in two cars and alleged that they were kidnapped, assaulted and demanded a sum of Rs.4 lakhs was made; that subsequently, the victims were released after extorting money 2/6

from them. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that A1 alone collected the entire amount and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he was not involved in the above said offence. He further submitted that the co-accused was already granted anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 18.09.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.22543 of 2025 and the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, hence sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A6 in this case and he is owner of the vehicle, which was used for abducting the victims; and that the petitioner has no previous antecedents and the investigation is at final stage.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the coaccused was already granted anticipatory bail and taking note of the fact 3/6

that the investigation is almost completed, 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 No.II, Salem on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[b] 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; [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent 4/6

police on alternative days at 10.00 a.m., for a period of three months and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[d] 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];

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

07.10.2025 stn To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Salem.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sooramangalam Police Station, Salem District.

(Crime No.432 of 2025) 5/6

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

stn

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P. No.22424 of 2025 07.10.2025 6/6