Ananth v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Vadipatti

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and Crl.M.P(MD)No.8575 of 2025 1.Ananth 2.Arjun 3.Suresh 4.Vinoth 5.Vinith 6.Naveenkumar ... Petitioners/Respondents Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai.

(Crime No.152/2024) ... Respondent/Petitioner Prayer : Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS, to set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, Madurai District in Crl.M.P.No.2793 of 2024 dated 16.12.2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sevugaraja For Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor 1/6

ORDER

Challenging the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vaadipatti in Crl.M.P.No.2793 of 2024, dated 16.12.2024 cancelling the bail of the petitioners herein on the application made by the complainant/ State under Section 437 (5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, this criminal revision case is filed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Crime No. 152 of 2024 came to be registered as against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 387, 506(ii) of IPC @ 120(b), 147, 148, 149, 392 and 397 of IPC. The petitioners were enlarged on bail on certain conditions. However, on the ground of non-compliance of the bail conditions, the State had filed an application for cancellation of the bail and the same came to be allowed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti. Challenging the same, this criminal revision case is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were not able to comply with the conditions only because of the threat from the Inspector of police that they will further be implicated 2/6

in cases for the offence under Section 110 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner before the Trial Court should have filed an application for modification of condition and the same was not done. In view of the same, they are not able to comply the condition and hence, he pressed for allowing the revision case. He also submitted that they are ready to comply with any condition whatever would be inflicted by this Court in case of allowing the revision case.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) categorically contended that not even a single day they have appeared before the jurisdictional police for complying with the conditions passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate in the bail order and the allegation that the Inspector of Police threatened them with initiating proceedings under Section 110 of the Criminal Procedure Code is baseless and malicious and having not complied with the condition of the learned Trial court, they have filed this revision on evasive reasons and pressed for dismissal of the revision case.

3/6

5. Taking into consideration the default committed by the petitioners earlier, this Court is of the considered view that they should be imposed with severe condition. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that except one of the petitioners, against all the other petitioners, Non Bailable Warrant is pending. The impugned order in Crl.M.P.No. 2793 of 2024 dated 16.12.2024 is set aside and the petitioners are directed to appear before the respondent police on all working days twice at 10.00 a.m and 05.00 p.m for a period of two months.

6. With the above directions, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 12.08.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No gbg To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, Madurai District.

4/6

2.The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai.

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

5/6

L.VICTORIA GOWRI ,J.

gbg Order made in Dated: 12.08.2025 6/6