Ramesh @ Rameshkumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.02.2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL Ramesh @ Rameshkumar ... Petitioner / Accused No.1 Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Thiruvonam Police Station, Thanjavur District.
(Crime No.22 of 2025) ... Respondent / Complainant PRAYER :- The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in Crime No.22 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :
Mr.M.Karuppasamy For Respondent :
Mr.K.Sanjay Gandhi, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 30.01.2025 under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to grant an order of pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioner / Accused No.1 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence Punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 351(3) of 1/6
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, in Crime No.22 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.
3. The case of the prosecution is that there was a dispute between petitioners and the defacto complainant regarding the execution of an electric pole, which is said to have erected on the petitioner's land, due to the same, on 24.01.2025, at about 12.30 pm a wordy quarrel arose between the parties. At that time, the petitioner herein had attacked the defacto complainant with iron rod and also abused him in filthy language. Hence, the case.
4. Mr.M.Karuppasamy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He however submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. He therefore prays for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that both the petitioner and the defacto complainant are neighbours and the defacto complainant erected electric pole without getting permission from the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner herein had attacked the defacto complainant with iron rod and caused head injury and the defacto complainant was admitted in the hospital on 24.01.2025 and discharged on 14.02.2025. He further submits that no previous case is pending 2/6
against the petitioner and it is a case in counter. However, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.
6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.
7. In view of the offence alleged against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation is not necessary in this case. The petitioner has permanent residence and deep roots in the society and therefore, there is less possibility for absconding. Considering the same and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that there are no previous cases against the petitioner and it is a case in counter and with a view to give an opportunity to reform himself, this Court is inclined to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.
(i) The petitioner shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest or in the event of his surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu, Thanjavur District, within a period of 15 days from date on which the order copy is made ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate. (ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.
Practice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.
(iv) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(v) 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. (vi) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(vii) The petitioner shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house or his work place.
(viii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the concerned Magistrate.
(ix) The petitioner shall not directly or in-directly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and tamper the evidence.
(x) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court, as the case may be, is entitled to pass appropriate orders 4/6
against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the conditions stated supra.
sd/- 17/02/2025 / TRUE COPY / /02/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
trp TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ORATHANADU, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THANJAVUR DISTRICT AT KUMBAKONAM.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVONAM POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
5/6
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.2144 of 2025 Date :17/02/2025 RS/SKN/SAR-(26.02.2025) 6P 5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6