Ananthan @ Ananthakumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29.04.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVEL Ananthan @ Ananthakumar ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Gandamanur Police Station, Theni District.

Crime No.64 of 2025 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Prabu For Respondent :

Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS, 2023 PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.64 of 2025 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 25.04.2025 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 296(b), 132, 115(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 in Crime No.64 of 2025 on the file of the respondentpolice.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.04.2025, at about 04.00 p.m., when the defacto complainant and other workers were changing the street light, the father of the petitioner made a complaint over mobile phone that the power fuse of the transformer has blown. The defacto complainant reached the spot and found that the fuse is alright. While so, the petitioner came to the spot and quarrelled with the defacto complainant regarding the delay in fixing the electrical fault and abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and attacked him with hands. Hence, the case.

2/4

4. Mr.M.Prabu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and a false case has been foisted against him. He however submits that the petitioner is 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.S.S.Manoj, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that the defacto complainant was admitted in the hospital on 11.04.2025 and discharged on 16.04.2025. He further submits that the petitioner has one previous case. Therefore, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.

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

7. Considering the nature of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner against the defacto complainant and also considering the antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that if pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner, he may cause threat to the defacto complainant and other witnesses. Further, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary in this 3/4

case. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition dismissed. sd/- 29/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /05/2025 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, Gandamanur Police Station, Theni District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7877 of 2025 Date :29/04/2025 VN/26.05.2025 4P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4