Abdulla v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Abdulla S/o. Nawab, No.13/2, Nataraj Kovil Street, Saidapet, Vellore, Vellore District and 3 Others

2. Saifu S/o.Settu, No.1, Mohammed Bagar Saheb Street, Saidapet, Vellore, Vellore District.

4. Ayas @ Liya Kathali Ajas S/o. Ajas, No. 38/8, Kanar Masuthi Street, Saidapet, Vellore, Vellore District.

6. Yusuf @ Mohammed Yusuff S/o. Nawab, No.13/2, Nataraj Kovil Street, Saidapet, Vellore, Vellore District Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. State rep by Inspector of Police Vellore North (L and O) Police Station, Vellore, Vellore District. (Crime No.231 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.231 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of police, Vellore North (L and O) Police Station, Vellore District.

For Petitioner(s):

Vinodh Kumar S. Suresh A.S. Shankar M. Selvarasi G. Udhayakumar S. Lal Devasagayam U. Vignesh For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.side) For Intervener : Mr.N.Ponraj

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 191(2), 191(3), 296(b),115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.231 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that they are auto drivers, attacked the defacto complainant with knife due to previous enmity, caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it was a group clash, and the petitioners are innocent and have not committed the offences alleged by the defacto complainant. He also submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide with any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. Per contra learned counsel for the intervener submitted that petitioners are history sheeters with bad antecedents and caused grievous injuries. Hence, opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reported that the 1 st petitioner has 3 previous cases and the 3 rd petitioner has 2 previous cases. He further submitted that the victim has been

discharged from the hospital. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Considering that the petitioners 1 and 3 have bad antecedents, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1 and 3. As far as the petitioners 2 and 4 concerned, there are no previous cases pending against them and also considering that the victim has been discharged from the hospital, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 and 4 with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners 2 and 4 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-IV, Vellore on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition:

(a) If the petitioners 2 and 4 fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioners 2 and 4 shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

24-09-2025 mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-IV, Vellore.

2.State rep by Inspector of Police Vellore North (L and O) Police Station, Vellore, Vellore District. (Crime No.231 of 2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 24745 of 24-09-2025