Shankar v. State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Shankar Son of Velu, D.No.110, Mori Valavu, Reddairpatti Post, Kurumbapatti, Edappadi, Salem District.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The Sub- Inspector of Police, Deevattipatti Police Station Salem District. (Crime No.473/2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.473 OF 2025 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Deepan Uday Vengadesh Durai Raja V.K.

For Respondent(s):

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

For Intervener : Mr.T.Ganesan

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 189(2), 329 & 351(3) of BNS (142, 441, 506 of IPC) r/w 3(1) of TNPPDL Act in Crime No.473 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other accused had entered into defacto complainant's farm house and had threatened and damaged the windshield and door of the vehicle parked in the farm house and destroyed the fencing laid around the farmhouse. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reported the petitioner along with other accused entered the defacto complainant's farms house and damaged the vehicle and destroyed the fence. He further submitted that there is no previous case against him. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of the allegation that the petitioner has only accompanied the co-accused in the occurrence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with 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, Omalur, Salem 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 condition:

(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 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.

26-09-2025 Mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Omalur, Salem.

2.State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The Sub- Inspector of Police, Deevattipatti Police Station Salem District. (Crime No.473/2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 26712 of 26-09-2025