Jeeva v. State By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Jeeva S/o.Karthik, Navapatti Village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

Petitioner(s) Vs State By, The Inspector of Police, Mettur Police Station, Salem District.

Crime No.576 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER:- The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., praying to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in Crime No.576 of 2025, on the File of Inspector of Police, Mettur Police Staton, Salem District. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Silambu Selvan 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 296(b), 109, 351(3) of BNS, r/w Section 4 of TNPWH Act on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 26.11.2025 at about 06.45 p.m. in their residential locality, the street light was not turned on. Therefore, the defacto complainant's husband went outside to check the same and noticed that the petitioner was having the fuse carrier in his hand. When the defacto complainant's husband questioned the same, a quarrel arose between them and in sequence of this incident, on the same day at 7 p.m, the petitioner along with his brother and father entered into the defacto complainant's house and assaulted her husband and caused injuries to him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is an innocent and he is nothing to do with the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. 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 due to the wordy quarrel, the petitioner along with his brother tresspassed into the house of the defacto complainant, assaulted her husband and caused injuries. Further he would submit that the injured was discharged from hospital and there is no previous case against the petitioner. However, he opposed for granting 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 there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant's husband and the injured was discharged from hospital, no previous case is pending against the petitioner 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 Judicial Magistrate No.2, Mettur and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police 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.Judicial Magistrate No.2, Mettur.

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

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

P.DHANABAL J.

rst 26-12-2025