Vijayakuamr v. The State By, The Sub Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Vijayakumar ... Petitioner Vs.
State by:
The Sub- Inspector of Police, Pachal Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
(Crime No.134 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.134 of 2025 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, Pachal Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
For Petitioner :
Mr.S.Silambuselvan For Respondent :
Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.07.2025, for the offence punishable under Section 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 351(3) of BNS @ Section 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 351(3), 103(1) 1/6
of BNS (u/s. 294(b), 323, 326, 307, 506(ii), 302 of IPC) in Crime No.134 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, due to a family dispute, the petitioner herein, along with other accused, restrained the deceased Ragul at the bus stand and attacked him with aruval and a stone. As a result, the deceased, Ragul sustained injuries and subsequently died. The petitioner seeks bail on the ground that there was no premeditation to cause the homicidal death of Ragul. It is further submitted that, When there was a wordy quarrel between the father and the son, some villagers intervened , and this petitioner allegedly slapped the father of the deceased. Due to the said incident, a quarrel ensued, and in the course of the same, both parties attacked each other, resulting in the death of Rahul.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitting that A1 to A4 were arrested and are in judicial custody. It is submitted that the investigation has been completed, all the accused have been secured, and the coaccused have already been released on bail. 2/6
4.
Considering the fact that the investigation is almost completed, and that the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, and also taking into account the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
5. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.134 of 2025, and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Chengam and on further conditions that: [a] 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; [b] the petitioner shall stay at Erode and report before the Town Police Station, Erode at 10.00 a.m., for a period of three months, thereafter, appear before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. Until further orders.
3/6
(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 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 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.
(g) the father of the deceased is permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner in Crime No.134 of 2025, on proper identification, in the manner known to law.
6. Considering the fact that the deceased was aged about 22 years, has left behind his family members, this Court is inclined to refer the matter under the Victim Compensation Scheme. Accordingly, the District Legal Services Authority of Thiruvannamalai has referred the matter to the District Collector under the said Scheme. The District Collector is directed to provide a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-, to the family of the deceased, within a period of 4/6
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The parents of the deceased are equally entitle to receive the proportionate compensation. 11.09.2025 rri 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.
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Chengam.
2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pachal Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5.The District Legal Services Authority,Thiruvannamalai . 5/6
T.V.THAMILSELVI , J.
rri 11.09.2025 6/6