Ramana 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. Ramana

2. Madhuraraj Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police, Malliyakarai Police Station, Salem District. (crime No. 87 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest, in Crime No. 87 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Malliyakarai Police Station, Salem District. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Vasudevan Bramalingam For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate Crl.side

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 191(2), 329(4), 303(2) BNS r/w Section 3 of PPDL Act 1992 @ u/s 191(2), 329(4) BNS r/w Section 3 of PPDL Act 1992 in Crime No.87 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The prosecution alleges that Mayakkannan, the defcto complainant's son, eloped with A2's sister (Maheswari) on 11 June 2025. In retaliation, A2 (Maheswari's brother) and others damaged the defacto complainant's house (door, cot, TV etc).

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons, and due to previous enmity, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case; that the petitioners and the complainant are known to each other; and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary in this case and hence, prayed for anticipatory bail to the

petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the defacto complainant's son Mayakkannan eloped with A2's sister, Maheswari, and this was resented by A2. Consequently, the petitioners and co-accused trespassed into the defacto complainant's house and damaged house hold articles. He further submitted that A1 and A6 have been arrested and subsequently released on bail.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6.Considering the nature of dispute; that the co-accused has been released on bail and the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

7. 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Attur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] 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, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala reported in [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

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

12-09-2025 gbi

To 1.State rep by The Inspector of Police, Malliyakarai Police Station, Salem District. (crime No. 87 of 2025) 2.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Attur.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

gbi CRL OP No. 24637 of 12-09-2025