Balamurugan v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
1. Balamurugan S/o. Babu, No.231, Pillaiyar kovil street, Manicakavalli, modaiyur, Thiruvannamalai 606902
2. Vinothkumar S/o Mannu, No.20, Amman Kovil Street, Kamaraj Nagar, Thuthipattu, Vellore- 632 011.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. State Rep by, The Inspector of Police K-11 CMBT Police station, Koyambedu,Chennai- 600 107. (Crime No.477 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No . 477/2025 on the file of the respondent police. 1/6
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.T.Annaamalai For Respondent(s):
Mr. S.Udayakumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 127(7), 115(2), 118(1) and 351 (3) of BNS and equivalent Sections of I.P.C. is 364, 340, 323, 324, 506(2) in Crime No.477 of 2025 on the file of respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that in order to extract money from the defacto complainant, the petitioners along with other accused enacted a drama as if they have abducted brother of defacto complainant and said to have demanded a sum of of Rs.4,00,000/- and a sum of Rs.40,000/- was paid by way of gpay.. Hence, the present complaint was lodged against the petitioners.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit they have been falsely implicated in this case as if they along with other accused detained one Vinay and demanded money. He would submit that they have not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and they are no way connected with the occurrence and they will abide by any condition that may be 2/6
imposed by this court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that the petitioners along with other accused have kidnapped the victim and on keeping him in custody, they demanded money from the mother of victim and she had also paid a sum of Rs.40,000/-. He would also submit that if they are released on anticipatory bail, they will tamper the evidence and hamper the investigation and investigation is almost completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. On seeing the facts, it reveals that now as on date, A1 to A3 were arrested and released on bail and these petitioners are police constables, who are arrayed as A5 and A6 in this case and now, both of them were suspended from service. Considering that and also considering the above fact and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6.
Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned V Metropolitan 3/6
Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, and the petitioners shall also execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which, one surety must be a blood surety, 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 petitioners 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police at every Tuesday and Friday at 10.30 a.m. for the period of three months and they shall cooperate with the investigation. [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioners 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 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]. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
12-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To
1. V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police, K-11, CMBT Police Station, Koyambedu, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 5/6
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rpp CRL OP No. 24354 of 12-09-2025 6/6