Viji Alais Vijayan v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL OP No. 35551 of 2025 1.Viji @ Vijayan S/o.Subramaniam, No.617, Kunnathur Road, Perundurai, Erode District - 638052 2.Boopathi @ Boopathiraja S/o.Muthusamy, No.25, Pavalathampalayam, Kadirampatti, Erode District-638107

4. Sathish @ Sathishkumar S/o. Duraisamy, No.4-84, Kanakkampalayam, Perundurai, Erode District-638052 Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Chennimalai Police Station, Erode District.

Crime No. 383 of 2025 Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No.383 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent.

1 / 6

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Nalliyappan R.

For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of B.N.S. in connection with the Crime No.383 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that there was a love affair between the de facto complainant and the daughter of Karuppusamy (A6) and Shanti (A7), knowing which, the accused A6 and A7 arranged marriage for their daughter, but, the same was stopped on the complaint of their daughter; while so, on 15.12.2025, when the de facto complainant went to see the daughter of A6 and A7, the petitioners herein along with other accused attacked him and abused him with filthy language and hence the case. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners are the relatives of A6 and A7 and they are innocent of the offences and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, the petitioners may be released on anticipatory bail.

2 / 6

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.383 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of B.N.S. and the case is under investigation. He would further submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and there is no previous case pending against the petitioners. However, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, considering the nature of offences, that there was a quarrel between the petitioners and the de facto complainant, that the injured has been treated discharged from the hospital and further considering the fact that there is no previous case pending against this petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions.

7.

Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and 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 3 / 6

copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai, on condition that the petitioners shall 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners and 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 every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners 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 his/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [d] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[e] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [f] 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 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 4 / 6

[(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; and [g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

30-12-2025 nsd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order 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.

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Chennimalai Police Station, Erode District.

Crime No. 383 of 2025 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5 / 6

P.DHANABAL, J.

nsd CRL OP No. 35551 of 2025 30-12-2025 6 / 6