← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11697/2025allowed

Mahendran v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Mandaiyur

2025-07-31Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 31/07/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI Mahendran, S/o.Sembulingam ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by, the Inspector of Police, Mandaiyur Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

(Crime No.28 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Manojkumar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.28 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. (Offences were amended vide Court order, dated 22.07.2025, in Crl.M.P.(MD)No.9600 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11697 of 2025) 1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.28 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is an employee of the defacto complainant's hotel. On 04.07.2025, at around 4.30 p.m., the petitioner went to the de-facto complainant's hotel and quarrelled over his salary, which led to an assault. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and is in no way connected with the alleged occurrence as stated by the prosecution. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submits that the petitioner is the sole accused in this case, and the issue pertains to a civil dispute. The injured was treated only as an outpatient. He further submitted that there are no previous cases registered against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/5

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, and also taking note of the fact that the issue pertains to a civil dispute, and that there are no previous cases registered against the petitioner, and that the injured was treated only as an outpatient, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur, 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur, 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 mobile number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur. In the event of any change in his residential 3/5

address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur;

(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/- 31/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / /2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

4/5

mkn TO 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Mandaiyur Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11697 of 2025 Date :31/07/2025 AS/29.08.2025/5P/4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 5/5