Prasanth v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.26003 of 2025 Prasanth ... Petitioner Vs.
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Paradarami Police Station, Vellore District.
... Respondent (Cr.No.62 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No.62 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramkumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) and 317(5) of BNS (U/s 379, 411 and 414 of IPC) in Cr.No.62 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
1/5
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's two wheeler bearing Regn.No.TN-23-Cy-5296 Splendor Plus was stolen by the accused herein. Hence, the present complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been wrongly implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the petitioner involved in this case was arrayed as A6. The stolen vehicle was recovered from him. He further reported that there is no previous case as against this petitioner/A6. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/5
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel, and taking note of the fact that the stolen vehicle was recovered and there is no previous case as against the petitioner, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that:
(a) If the petitioner 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 3/5
one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory 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 Act.
22.09.2025 Vv To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham.
2. The The Inspector of Police, Paradarami Police Station, Vellore District.
3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
4/5
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.26003 of 2025 22.09.2025 5/5