← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9449/2025allowed

Vino Alias Vinomani Alias Vivek v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

2025-06-13Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 13/06/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI Vino @ Vinomani @ Vivek S/o.Mani

...Petitioner/Sole Accused

Vs.

The State of Tamilnadu rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Uvari Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.103 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.C.Susi Kumar Advocate For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.103 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/5

The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under section 306 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.103 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the building contractor, under him, more than 20 persons are working, including the petitioner. The petitioner has been working as a driver for the past 1 3⁄4 years. Due to salary dispute, the petitioner stolen the cash of Rs.2,50,000/-, Mobile Phone and Splendor Bike of the defacto complainant. Hence, a case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that the petitioner is arrayed as sole accused and he stolen the cash of Rs.2,50,000/-, Mobile Phone and Splendor Bike of the defacto complainant. He would further submit that during enquiry, Rs.1,75,000/- was recovered from the petitioner and the remaining amount and bike have not been recovered. Hence, he objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that though during enquiry Rs.1,75,000/- was recovered from the petitioner, the 2/5

respondent police has not arrested the accused and also considering the fact that the name of the accused has been found in the FIR, further the date of occurrence is 17.04.2025, by this time most of the investigation would have been completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition 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 contact number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram.

3/5

(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 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/petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

sd/- 13/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /06/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

4/5

VSD TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RADHAPURAM.

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI.

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

(CRIME NO.103 OF 2025) 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9449 of 2025 Date :13/06/2025 NM/24.06.2025 5P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5