← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/24871/2025granted

V.M.Baskar, v. State By Inspector Of Police,

2025-09-11Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.Thamilselvi6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

1. V.M.Baskar, s/o.Munusamy, 22/29, Tharumarayan Street, Stuart pet, Arakonam, Vellore District.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State by Inspector of Police, Tiruttani Police Station, Crime No.

420/2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No. 420/2025 pending on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner(s):

C.Karthik M.Ganesh Babu R.Aiswarya

M.Thiyagarajan For Respondent(s):

Mr. G. Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

This petition has been filed to enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No. 420/2025 pending on the file of the respondent.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant borraowed a sum of Rs.35,000/- from A1 for which he had repaid some part amount as interest and subsequently the defacto complainant could not repaid the principal and the interest. On 20.08.2025, the petitioner along with other accused abducted the defacto complainant, his wife and daughter and confined them in private lodge and assaulted them with plastic pipe and subsequently released them and threatened with dire consequences. The FIR was registered in crime No. 420 of 2025 under Sections 137(2), 127(2), 296(B), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS r/w Section 4 of TNPWH Act altered to Sections 137(2), 140(2), 127(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS r/w Section 4 of TNPWH Act and remanded the petitioner to judicial custody.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Further, he submits that the defacto complainant borrowed money from A1 and the same was not repaid and to escape from the liability the false complaint was foisted as against the petitioner. Hence, the prays to allow this petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl .side) raised objection stating that the owner of the lodge and also the financier, at the instigation of the petitioner the defacto complainant and his family members were illegally detained in the lodge. Hence, he prays to dismiss this petition.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there was money transaction between the parties. Further, the investigation is almost completed. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Further, the petitioner has caused mental agony to the defacto complainant, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the credit of crime No. 420 of 2025 and the defacto complainant is permitted to withdraw the same.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing separate bonds for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, in which one surety must be a blood surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani, and on further conditions 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police on alternative days at 10.30 a.m. for the period of three months.

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(d) the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

11-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes pbl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani.

2. The Inspector of Police, Tiruttani Police Station.

3. The Central Prison - II, Puzhal.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Note :-

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the Official Website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR Code.

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

CRL OP No. 24871 of 11-09-2025