E. Ajith Kumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30-12-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP No. 36095 of 2025 E. Ajith Kumar S/o.Elumalai, No.18, Small Colony Street, Periya Venmani Post, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu 603 311.
Petitioner(s) Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by The Inspector of Police, E-1, Mylapore Police Station, Chennai.
Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail on event of arrest in Crime No.676 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police station E-1 Mylapore Police Station, Chennai.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Venkateswara Babu For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 309(4), 311 of BNS Act, in connection with Crime No.676 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to a dispute over the sharing of side dishes, the petitioner and others assaulted the defacto complainant and snatched his cellphone. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the property was recovered and that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner, however investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature, hence opposed to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side; the nature of offences; and the fact that the property has been recovered and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai on condition that the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 [(2005)13 SCC 283].
[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
30-12-2025 Jd/vm Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To
1. The XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai
2. The Inspector of Police, E-1, Mylapore Police Station, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
P.DHANABAL J.
jd/vm CRL OP No. 36095 of 2025 30-12-2025