Danesh @ Muthukumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07/03/2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Danesh @ Muthukumar S/o.Natesan

...Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known

Vs.

State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Pasupathipalayam Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.49 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P.Prakash Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.49 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/ Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 329(4), 132, 351(3) of BNS 1/5

and Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act in Crime No.49 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.0.2025 all the accused persons played a Kabadi Match at Pathayur Sanapiratti Village without permission of the Karur Corporation and the accused person trespassed into the community hall and caused mischief. Thereafter, the next day when the defacto complainant questioned same some wordy quarrel arose between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police has registered a false case against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 329(4), 132, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act in Crime No.49 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and this petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and during the Kabbadi Match, the Villagers used the community hall thereby this petitioner was arrayed as one of the accused and also submitted that except few sentences all the offences are bailable in nature. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the 2/5

petitioner and others without knowledge of the PWD Authorities had broken the door of the community hall for Kabbadi Match purpose and when the same was questioned by the officials, the petitioner along with other accused have assaulted the Government officials and thereby a complaint was lodged. The FIR has been registered recently, as of now the case is under investigation. Further he submitted that the petitioner is having 19 previous cases out of which 10 cases are pending against him and thereby strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, nobody was injured in this case, and though the petitioner has previous cases, in all cases bail was granted to him. I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 Judicial Magistrate No.1, Karur and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 am for a period of eight weeks and as and when required for the interrogation.

3/5

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[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.

sd/- 07/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / /03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

NST TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KARUR.

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARUR.

4/5

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PASUPATHIPALAYAM POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.3978 of 2025 Date :07/03/2025 SA/SKN/SAR. /27.03.2025/5P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 5/5