Painda @ Suresh v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 01.07.2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Painda @ Suresh, S/o.Late Ramasamy

...Petitioner/ Accused No.3

Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Pasupathipalayam Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.64 of 2025) ... Respondent/ Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.SMA.Jinnah, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS, 2023. PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.64 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. 1/7

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.03.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 103(1), 109(1), 351(3), 61(2), 191(2), 103(2), 49 and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.64 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's husband, Santhosh Kumar, who worked for Painta Suresh at Amaravathi Finance in Karur, attended a birthday celebration for Painta Suresh on 15.03.2025 at the defacto complainant's rented house. During the party, a quarrel broke out between Santhosh Kumar and his friend Prakash, leading Santhosh to hit Prakash with a beer bottle. Later that night, Prakash and others called Santhosh to a location near Narikattiyur Child Jesus School. When Santhosh arrived with his friends, Prakash allegedly stabbed him in the chest, while another accused attempted to stab him, causing injury to one Hari Prasad. Santhosh Kumar was taken to Karur Government Medical College Hospital, where he was declared dead. Hence the case. 2/7

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 submit that the petitioner had earlier filed a bail petition before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Karur, in Crl.M.P. No. 796 of 2025, and the same was dismissed on 09.06.2025. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 17.03.2025. Hence, he seeks bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that there are totally six accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A3. He would further submit that investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed through e-filing mode. He would further submit that A4 and A5 have been granted station bail. He would further submit that there are two previous cases against the petitioner. Therefore, he opposes the grant of 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 and the 3/7

nature of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration and also taking note that the investigation has already been completed and the charge sheet has already been filed through efiling mode, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, subject to the following conditions:

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur, and on further conditions that:- [a] 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.I, Karur. If the petitioner changes his residential address, he shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur. 4/7

[c] the petitioner shall stay at Salem District and sign before the Inspector of Police, Shevapet Police Station, Salem District daily twice at 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m. until further orders.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

5/7

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

sd/- 01/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / 01/07/2025 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.I, KARUR.

2. DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARUR DISTRICT.

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PASUPATHIPALAYAM POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHEVAPET POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT .

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

6/7

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11092 of 2025 Date :01/07/2025 HPS/01.07.2025 /7P/7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7