M. Maharajan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.04.2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL 1.M.Maharajan 2.M.Soundarapandi 3.M.Sudha 4.M.Soundharya ... Petitioners / A1 to A4 Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Vilampatti Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.36 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 petitioners in Crime No.36 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police. For Petitioners :
Mr.S.Vijayakumar, Advocate For Respondent :
Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners on 01.04.2025 under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to grant an order of pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.36 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent-police stating that there was a dispute between him and the petitioners, who are his neighbours. The dispute arose over a trivial issue concerning water being poured in front of the house. It is alleged that, on 17.03.2025, the dispute led to a verbal altercation, which subsequently escalated into a physical confrontation, during which the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant and issued life threats. Hence, the case.
4. Mr.S.Vijayakumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are innocent persons, they have not committed any offence as alleged by 2/7
the prosecution and a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. He further contends that this is case in counter and that the 2nd petitioner was brutally attacked by the defacto complainant along with his family members. He however submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.
5. Per contra, Mr.S.S.Manoj, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that the petitioners have been arrayed been arrayed as A1 to A4. He further submits that the defacto complainant was admitted in the hospital on 17.03.2025 and discharged on 21.03.2025. He further submits that the petitioners started wordy quarrel with the defacto complainant and assaulted him and threatened with dire consequences. Therefore, if the petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, they will again cause threat to the defacto complainant. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.
6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.
7. The petitioners have permanent residence. Hence, there is less possibility of 3/7
absconding. Considering the same and also considering the nature of the offence alleged against the petitioners and taking note of the fact that the injured was discharged from hospital and with a view to give an opportunity to the petitioners to reform themselves, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of their arrest or in the event of their surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai. (ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity.
(iii) The first and second petitioners shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at 08.00 a.m. and 06.00 p.m. until further orders. 4/7
(iv) The third and fourth petitioners shall appear and sign before the respondent-police weekly once i.e., on every Sunday at 08.00 a.m. until further orders.
(v) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(vi) The petitioners 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. (vii) The petitioners shall also not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to the defacto complainant, his family members and witnesses and shall not tamper the evidence.
(viii) The petitioners shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house or his work place .
(ix) The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(x) The petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile number to the concerned Magistrate.
(xi) 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 5/7
against the petitioners 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/- 03/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (CS-I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NILAKOTTAI,DINDUGAL DISTRICT.
2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE DINDUGAL DISTRICT.
3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VILAMPATTI POLICE STATION,DINDIGUL DISTRICT.
4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
6/7
+1. CC to S.VIJAYAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.3894 (I) DT.04/04/2025 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.6103 of 2025 Date :03/04/2025 PR/29.04 .2025 7P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7