Parthasarathy v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.04.2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL Parthasarathy ... Petitioner / Sole Accused Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur District.
(Crime No.69 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.69 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police. For Petitioner :
Mr.K.M.Karunakaran, Advocate.
For Respondent :
Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 07.04.2025 under Section 482 of the 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 offence punishable under Sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A) of the Tamilnadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024,, in Crime No.69 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, who is the SubInspector of Police, preferred a complaint before the respondent-police against the petitioner. It is alleged that, on 14.03.2025 at about 07.00 hours, the respondentpolice conducted a raid near Naruvalikollai Bus Stop. During the said raid, the accused was found in possession of liquor bottles without a valid licence. Upon noticing the police, the petitioner fled from the place of occurrence. Subsequently, the respondent-police seized the liquor bottles. Based on the said complaint, a case was registered against the petitioner. Hence, the case. 2/7
4. Mr.K.M.Karunakaran, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He however submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and accordingly, he prays for the grant of pre-arrest bail.
5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that there are seven previous cases against the petitioner in similar nature. However, it is alleged that the petitioner possessed liquor for illegal commercial purposes. He therefore contends that if pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner, he may abscond and tamper with the evidence. Therefore, he submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.
6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.
7. The petitioner has permanent residence. Hence, there is less possibility of 3/7
absconding. Considering the same and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner and with a view to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, pre-arrest bail is granted 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, Pattukottai, 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.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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai. (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 petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.
4/7
(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 also not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper the evidence. (vii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(viii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the concerned Magistrate.
(ix) 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 against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are 5/7
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/- 17/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /05/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I /II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
pal To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai.
2 Do Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur @ Kumbakonam.
3.The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
+1. CC to K.M.KARUNAKARAN Advocate SR.No.4508 dt 22.04.2025
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.6648 of 2025 Date :17/04/2025 RK (13/05/2025) 7 P / 6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17.07.2023. 7/7