D.Sangarapandi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.04.2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL 1.D.Sangarapandi 2.D.Suthanthira Pandi ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

(Crime No.90 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.90 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police. For Petitioners :

Mr.K.Sheenivasan, 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 petitioners on 08.04.2025 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 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.90 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners/accused persons on 24.03.2025 at about 08.00 p.m., stating that the defacto complainant, along with other members of his community, had decided to construct a Krishna temple on a patta land belonging to one Pasangkarai, who also belongs to the same community. At that time, certain persons belonging to another community objected, by stating that taxes should also be collected from their community members and that the temple should be constructed jointly. It was decided that no temple construction work should proceed until find the solution for this issue. However, as the de-facto complainant's father commenced the construction of a temple, all the accused persons abused him in filthy language and assaulted the de-facto complainant with wooden logs and 2/7

sticks. As a result of the injuries sustained, the defacto complainant was admitted to the Thiruchuli Government Hospital. Hence, the case.

4. Mr.K.Sheenivasan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are innocent persons, they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. 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.K.Sanjai Gandhi, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that there are totally nine accused persons in this case and the petitioners have been arrayed as A1 and A2. He further submits that A3 and A6 were arrested and subsequently released on bail. He also submits that the incident arose out of a temple-related dispute. He further submits that four persons sustained injuries, of whom three were treated as outpatients, while the defacto complainant was admitted to the hospital on 23.03.2025 and discharged on 27.03.2025. He further submits that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. He further contends that if the petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, they will again cause threat to the defacto complainant. He therefore prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition. 3/7

6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.

7. The petitioners have permanent residence and deep roots in the society. Hence, there is less possibility of 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, Thiruchuli, Virudhunagar District, 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) each 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, Thiruchuli, Virudhunagar District. (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'].

identity proofs to ensure their identity.

(iii) The petitioners shall stay at Tiruchirappalli District and sign before the Inspector of Police, Cantonment Police Station, Tiruchirappalli District, daily at 09.00 a.m. and 06.00 p.m. until further orders after the execution of suretyship. (iv) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

(v) 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. (vi) 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.

(vii) The petitioners shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house or his working place and shall also not try to contact the defacto complainant. (viii) The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

(ix) The petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile number to the concerned Magistrate.

5/7

(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 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/- 15/04/2025 / 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, THIRUCHULI, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

6/7

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Copy to The Inspector of Police, Cantonment Police Station, Tiruchirappalli District.

+1 CC to M/s.K.SHEENIVASAN, Advocate ( SR-4361[I] dated 17/04/2025 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6809 of 2025 Date :15/04/2025 MK/SAR /05.05.2025 7P/7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7