R.Mayakannan v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.30276 of 2025 1.R.Mayakannan 2.Raju ... Petitioners

Versus

The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Karumalaikoodal Police Station, Salem District.

(Crime No.519 of 2025) .. Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.519 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners :

Mr.C.Deepak Kumar For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(3) of Bns r/w Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.519 of 2025 seek anticipatory bail. 1/5

2.The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners joining hands with other accused attacked the defacto complainant with iron rod and stick, caused severe injuries to him. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have 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 petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the injured was discharged from the hospital and that the petitioner has no previous case pending against him. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the fact that the injured was discharged from the hospital and the petitioner has no previous case pending against him, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions: 2/5

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Mettur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only), each 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:

(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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks.

(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the 3/5

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) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

06.11.2025 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Mettur.

2. The Inspector of Police, Karumalaikoodal Police Station, Salem District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl 4/5

CRL.O.P.No.30276 of 2025 06.11.2025 5/5