Prabavathi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Its Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.Nos.29597 and 29602 of 2025 Prabavathi ... Petitioner (Crl.OP.No.29597 of 2025) Balaji ... Petitioner (Crl.OP.No.29602 of 2025) Vs.

The State of Tamilnadu Rep by its Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Police Station, Villupuram District.

... Respondent (Cr.No.727 of 2025) ( in both Crl.OPs) COMMON PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioners pending investigation in Cr.No.727 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/7

Crl.O.P.Nos.29597 and 29602 of 2025 For Petitioners : Mr.A.M.Esakkiappan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) COMMON O R D E R The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.10.2025 and 20.10.2025 respectively for the alleged offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 132, 121(1), 127, 109(1), 303(2), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.727 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, the defacto complainant who is the Sub Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Police Station, went to the house of one Sudhagar, who is the absconding accused in the sand theft case in Cr.No.610 of 2025 of Villupuram Taluk Police Station. When the complainant tried to arrest the said Sudhagar, he abused him in filthy language and also attacked him with screw driver on his neck, chest with an intention to murder him and caused injuries to him. The further prosecution of the case is that the family members of the said Sudhagar namely A2 to A5 including the petitioners herein, prevented the police official from discharging his official duty and also caused damages to the Walkie Talkie of the police official. Hence, the 2/7

present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not having any specific overt act and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are in custody from 19.10.2025 and 20.10.2025 respectively and prays to grant bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the injured was discharged from the hospital. He further reported that there are no previous cases as against the petitioners . Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioners and taking into account the period of incarceration and there are no previous cases as against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing bonds for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned 3/7

Judicial Magistrate-I, Villupuram 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 petitioners shall report before the Judicial Magistrate Court-I, Villupuram on all working days at 10.30 a.m., for a period of the three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

[d] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;

[e] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned 4/7

conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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)13 SCC 283];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 30.10.2025 Vv 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.

5/7

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Villupuram

2. The Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Police Station, Villupuram District.

3. The District Jail, Vedampattu, Villupuram District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5. The Sub Jail, Villupuram 6/7

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv Crl.O.P.Nos.29597 and 29602 of 2025 30.10.2025 7/7