S.Uchumahali 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 S.Uchumahali ... Petitioner / Accused No.3 Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Kayathar Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
(Crime No.124 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.124 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :
Mr.K.Prabhu, 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 petitioner on 15.04.2025 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)(A) of the Tamilnadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024 and Section 4(1)(i) of the Tamilnadu Prohibition Act, in Crime No.124 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, being a police official, based on secret information, proceeded to the place of occurrence and found Accused Nos.1 and 2 in possession of certain bottles of brandy. Pursuant to their confession, the respondent-police recovered 50 bottles from the house of the petitioner. Accordingly, the defacto complainant registered a case against the petitioner and Accused Nos.1 and 2. Hence, the case.
4. Mr.K.Prabhu, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the 2/7
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.S.S.Manoj, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that there are totally three accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A3. He further submits that there are four previous cases against the petitioner in similar nature. Further he submits 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 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 3/7
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 No.II, Kovilpatti, 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) 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 No.II, Kovilpatti.
(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 NO.II, KOVILPATTI.
2. DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI.
3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYATHAR POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
6/7
+1 CC to M/s.K.PRABHU, Advocate ( SR-4446[I] dated 21/04/2025 )
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.6894 of 2025 Date :17/04/2025 VN/12.05.2025 7P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7