M Marimuthu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Karimedu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 04.07.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI M.Marimuthu .. Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Karimedu Police Station, Madurai City.
(in Crime No.309 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P.Edin Brough For Respondent :Mr.S.Prakash Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.309 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 132, 133 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.309 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is employed as a driver with the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation at the Tirupur Branch. On 08.06.2025, at about 8:30 p.m., he was deputed to drive a bus bearing Registration No.TN-38-N-0297 from Tirupur to Arappalayam, Madurai, as a special trip. Since there was a large number of passengers waiting at the Arappalayam Bus Stand, he dropped the passengers outside the bus stand. At that time, the petitioner, who is working as an Assistant Manager with the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, allegedly snatched the invoice from the conductor and argued with him, and directed him to come to the office to collect it.
When the defacto complainant went to the office to collect the invoice, the petitioner is said to have abused him using filthy language and also assaulted him with a slipper. The said incident was recorded on a mobile phone by one of the public and circulated on social media. Subsequently, due to bodily pain, the defacto complainant was admitted to Dharapuram Government Hospital.
be registered. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent 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 further submit that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that there are totally five accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A1. He would further submit that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital. He would also submit that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. He would also submit that the investigation is almost completed. However, he opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and the investigation has been almost completed and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
3/6
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 Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai, 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 Judicial Magistrate No.V, 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 Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the Judicial Magistrate No.V, 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;
4/6
(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 thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.
sd/- 04/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
MSRM TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, MADURAI.
5/6
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE , MADURAI.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARIMEDU POLICE STATION, MADURAI CITY.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to P.EDIN BROUGH Advocate SR.No.7193 (I) DT.07/07/2025
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11312 of 2025 Date :04/07/2025 NM/14.07.2025/ 6P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6