Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10232/2025allowed

Karthick v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-06-27Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/06/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI 1.Karthick S/o.Subramaniyan 2.Deivendran S/o.Subramaniyan 3.Manimegalai W/o.Deivendran 4.Ramya W/o.Karthick 5.Valli W/o.Subramaniyan ... Petitioners/ Accused Nos.1 to 5 Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.283 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.B.Santhanam Rajesh Kumar Advocate 1/5

For Respondent : Mr.C.Prakash Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.283 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 191(2), 296(b), 324(4), 115(2), 133, 118(2), 351(2) of BNS r/w 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.283 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the petitioners are neighbours. Due to civil dispute between the defacto complainant and the petitioners on 03.06.2025 at about 8.00 p.m., the petitioners demolished the boundary stone and removed the fencing. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language, and the petitioners 2 to 5 threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences and also attacked him with their hands. Hence, a case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the 2/5

petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that it is a case in counter. The respondent police has registered the case in Crime No.282 of 2025 U/s.191(2),296(b), 115(2), 118 (1), 126(2) and 351(2) of BNS against the defacto complainant. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that it is a case in counter and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that it is a case in counter and the injured has already been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District, 3/5

failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

(a) the petitioners 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 petitioners shall furnish their residential address and contact number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District. In the event of any change in their residential address, the petitioners shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District; (c) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

(d) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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; 4/5

(g) if the accused/petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

sd/- 27/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.-I/ II /III/ IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

vsd TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10232 of 2025 Date :27/06/2025 NBF/08.07.2025 5P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5