Muthuraj v. State Rep By The Deputy Commissioner Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.28014 of 2025 Muthuraj ... Petitioner

Versus

The State rep by its, 1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore District.

2.The Inspector of Police, D-1 Ramanathapuram Police Station, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.433 of 2025) 3.Lawrence .. Respondents Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.433 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Subramanian For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 & R2 : Mr.Lawrence for R3

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS 1/6

Act, 2023 and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in Crime No.433 of 2025 seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with other accused abused the defacto complainant with caste name and that the first petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with beer bottle and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner also belongs to the scheduled caste community and for which the SC/ST Act is not applicable. He further submitted that the petitioner is only the friend of A1, and he is innocent, having been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that totally there are two accused in this case and the petitioner herein is ranked as A2. He further submitted that the main accused/A1 was arrested and released on bail and that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned 2/6

Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. Today, the 3rd respondent/defacto complainant appeared in person before this Court, and on enquiry, he stated that the petitioner also belongs to the scheduled caste community.

7. On perusal of the FIR, it is seen that the specific overt act is attributed against the petitioner/A1, who was arrested and released on bail.

8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the main accused/A1 was already released on bail and since the SC/ST Act is not applicable to the facts of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

9. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Special Court for trial of cases under SC/ST Act, Coimbatore, 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

3/6

(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, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(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 269 of B.N.S.

27.10.2025 drl To 1.The Special Court for trial of cases under SC/ST Act, Coimbatore.

4/6

2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore District.

3.The Inspector of Police, D-1 Ramanathapuram Police Station, Coimbatore District.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl 5/6

CRL.O.P.No.28014 of 2025 27.10.2025 6/6