Ranganathan v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Ranganathan, S/o.Arumugam, No.43, Arunachalapuram, 1st Street, Adyar, Chennai District.

Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police, J-5, Sastri Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

Respondent(s) PRAYER:-The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No.225 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, J-5, Sastri Nagar Police Station, Chennai District on such terms and conditions as this Court may deem fit. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.11.2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 75, 79 of BNS Act, 2023 r/w Section 4 of TNPHW Act on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are living in the same area. On 03.10.2025, when the defacto complainant was on her terrace, the petitioner, who was in a drunken state, entered into the defacto complainant's house compound and made obscene gestures in front of her. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that due to previous enmity, the defacto complainant lodged false complaint against the petitioner and the respondent has also registered a case under Sections 75, 79 of BNS Act, 2023 r/w Section 4 of TNPHW Act. The petitioner is an innocent and he is nothing to do with the alleged offences. He is in judicial custody from 27.11.2025. Therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that both the petitioner and the defacto complainant are neighbours and on 03.10.2025, when the defacto complainant was on her terrace, the petitioner, who was in a drunken state, entered into the defacto complainant's house compound and made obscene gestures in front of her. Further, there is no previous case against the petitioner and the investigation is pending. Hence, strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the nature of offences and the fact that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are neighbours and there is a previous disputes between them and also taking note of the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:- [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the Town Police Station, Kancheepuram daily at 10.00 a.m. for 30 days and thereafter as and when required;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

26-12-2025 rst Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes 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 official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To 1.IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet.

2.The Inspector of Police, J-5, Sastri Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

P.DHANABAL J.

rst 26-12-2025