M.Ajith Kumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.03.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVEL M.Ajith Kumar ... Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Kurangani Police Station, Theni District.
Crime No.21 of 2024 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :
Mr.M.P.Vasandharam For Respondent :
Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.21 of 2024 on the file of the respondent-police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/4
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 13.03.2025 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to grant an order of pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 309(4) and 311 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 altered to Sections 140(2), 309(4), 311 and 61(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.21 of 2024 on the file of the respondent-police.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 08.08.2024, the petitioner and other accused persons abducted the defacto complainant by threatening him with a deadly weapon, demanded 15 lakhs from the defacto complainant's wife and also robbed a sum of Rs.4,000/- from the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.
4. Mr.M.P.Vasandharam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He however submits that the petitioner is 2/4
ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that this is the second pre-arrest bail application, and the earlier application in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22141 of 2024 filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn. He further submits that the petitioner is A4 and that A1 to A4 abducted the defacto complainant at knife point and demanded ransom. He further submits that A1 passed away, and A5 was already released on bail. However, he submits that in view of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case. He therefore, prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.
6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records including the First Information Report as well as the averments in the petition.
7. In view of the averments made in the petition and in view of the nature of offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner in this case is essential for the purpose of 3/4
investigation and that if pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner, he may commit similar type of offence, abscond and cause threat to the defacto complainant and his family members. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 17/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
MBI TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KURANGANI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.4837 of 2025 Date :17/03/2025 HPS/SAR / 02.04.2025/4P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023.
4/4