M.Saravanan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19.06.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI M.Saravanan ... Petitioner / Accused No.7 Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thalaiyuthu Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.254 of 2025) ... Respondent / Complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.254 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Perumal, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2), 296(b), 118(1), 115(2), and 351

(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.254 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, namely Chandru, lodged a complaint against the petitioner and seven others, alleging that on 11.05.2025 at about 08.00 p.m., the defacto complainant and his friend, Esakki Muthu, were riding a bike bearing registration number TN-72-BJ-8833 to visit the defacto complainant's aunt's house at Kattampuli. When they reached near the Melapalamadai bus stand, it is alleged that due to previous enmity, the accused persons obstructed their bike. A wordy quarrel ensued, during which the accused persons allegedly used filthy language, issued life threats, and assaulted the defacto complainant and his friend with their hands and a wooden log. Based on this, the present complaint came to be lodged. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. He would further submit that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that there are totally eight accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A7. He would further submit that the accused persons used filthy language, issued life threats, and assaulted the defacto complainant and his friend with their hands and a wooden log. He would further submit that, in this case, three persons sustained injuries, underwent treatment, and were subsequently discharged. He would also submit that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. Therefore, he opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court has heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, the fact that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital and also taking note that there are no previous cases against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of 3/6

Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli and on further conditions that:

(a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. (b) the petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli.

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. (f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the 4/6

learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]. (g) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

8. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the conditions stated supra.

sd/- 19/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /06/2025 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.III, TIRUNELVELI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THALAIYUTHU POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

5/6

+1. CC to M/S.M.PERUMAL Advocate SR.No.6616 (I) DT.20/06/2025

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8820 of 2025 Date :19/06/2025 NM/04.07.2025/ 6P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6