P. Jaji @Jo Jo v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. P. Jaji @Jo Jo S/o. Palani 260 Perumal Kovil Street Maduravoyal Chennai-600095 Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State rep. by Inspector of Police, T4 Police Station, Maduravoyal, Thivuvallur Crime No 617 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the Petitioner on Bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No. 617 of 2025 on the- file. of Respondent . Police, pending investigation and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Sumathi Purushothaman KIRUBANANDHAM K.Ashok Kumar S.Senthilkumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 329(4), 308(4), 351(2) of BNS Act in Crime No.617 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that due to money dispute the petitioner joined hands with other accused approached the defacto complainant and demanded to return back the money @ Rs.3,00,000/- which was already paid to him for getting job in IT company. Since he has not repaid the same, the petitioner along with other accused attacked the defacto complainant with hands and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by this Court on

24.09.2025 in Cr.O.P.No.26292 of 2025. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the defacto complainant running a employment consultant, and one of the accused viz., Venkatesh approached the defacto complainant and paid a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- for want of job in IT company and subsequently, he got job in another company. Hence, A1 to A3 approached the defacto complainant and demanded to return back the money but the same was not repaid. Hence A1 to A3 attacked the defacto complainant with hands. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), and also considering that the co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 24.09.2025 in Cr.O.P.No.26292 of 2025, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

6. 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 ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee, 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 of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(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 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

25-09-2025 mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee. 2.State rep. by Inspector of Police, T4 Police Station, Maduravoyal, Thivuvallur Crime No 617 of 2025 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 26463 of 25-09-2025