← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9649/2025allowed

Ramesh @ A Ramesh Kumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2025-06-17Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17/06/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI Ramesh @ A.Rameshkumar, S/o.Alagar ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Madurai Town, Madurai City, Madurai.

(Crime No.10 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :

Mr.H.Mohammed Imran, Advocate for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondent :

Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS 1/6

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.10 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 75 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.10 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is working as an Accountant in Devar Modern Rice Mill and the petitioner is in-charge for the account section. In the meanwhile, the de-facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner that she was sexually assaulted by the petitioner. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. In fact, the de-facto complainant, who had recently joined the rice mill, was involved in certain malpractices. When the petitioner, in his capacity as the supervisor of the said mill, questioned her about the same, she developed a grudge against him. When the petitioner attempted to assign work to her, she resisted, claiming that she was unwilling to work under the petitioner as she was more educated than him. In 2/6

this regard, the petitioner informed the owner of the mill about the incident. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant, along with her associates, attacked the petitioner and caused injuries. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner is the sole accused in this case, and that no one sustained any injuries. He further submitted that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking note of the fact that even after the dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail application, the respondent police has not taken any effective steps to secure the accused, and that as the date of occurrence is 24.03.2025, by this time most of the investigation might have been completed, and that no one has sustained any injuries, and that there are no previous cases against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

6. 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.IV, Madurai 3/6

on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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.IV, Madurai 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.IV, Madurai. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai;

(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 4/6

law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the 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]; and; (g) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

sd/- 17/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /06/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

mkn TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.IV, MADURAI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI DISTRICT.

3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Madurai Town, Madurai City, Madurai.

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

5/6

+1 CC to M/s.M/S.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-6433[I] dated 18/06/2025 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9649 of 2025 Date :17/06/2025 MK/30.06.2025 6P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6