← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11991/2025allowed

Siva v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-07-18Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai8 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/07/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI and Crl.M.P(MD)No.9371 and 9431 of 2025 Siva, S/o.Perumal, ..Petitioner/Accused Rank not known (in CrlOP(MD)No.11991/2025) 1.S.Sasikumar, S/o.Shanmugam.

2.S.Vijai @ Vijay Shanmugasundaram, S/o.Shanmugasundaram.

3.Vignesh, S/o.Shanmugasundaram.

..Petitioners/Accused Rank not known (in CrlOP(MD)No.12007/2025) Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Koodal Pudhur Police Station, 1/8

Madurai District.

(Crime No.593 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant (in Crl.O.P(MD)No.11991/2025) For Petitioner : Mrs.S.Prabha, Advocate.

(in Crl.O.P(MD)No.12007/2025) For Petitioner : Mr.Sekar, Advocate.

(in both petitions) For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) (in both petitions) For Intervenor : Mr.M.Sheik Abdulla,Advoate.

PETITIONS FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS COMMON PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.593 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

COMMON ORDER: This Court made the following common order :- The petitioners /Accused Rank not known, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.06.2025 and 27.06.2025 respectively, for the offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 115(2) and 351(3) of BNS altered into Sections 140 (2), 115(2), 351(3), 61(2) and 127 of BNS in Crime No.593 of 2025 on the file of the 2/8

respondent police, seek bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and his friend namely Muralimanikandan and the accused persons have jointly done the business in the share market. Suddenly, there was loss in the business, the defacto complainant's friend could not repay the amount for his friend MuraliManikandan. Since there was a delay in repaying the amount. The petitioners have repeatedly demanded the debt amount, the same was not repaid. Thereafter, the accused 1 and 4 went to the defacto complainant's home and demanded money from his wife and brother and threatened them. In such circumstances, on 26.06.2025 when the defacto complainant's brother was waiting at Old Vilangudi stop, A1 and A3 along with other accused persons came there and questioned about the defacto complainant and pushed him into the Car and also threatened him with knife point. Hence, he contacted his brother/defacto complainant through phone and asked to pay the debt amount and rescue him. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.OP(MD)No.11991 of 2025 would 3/8

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 the petitioner is not present at the scene of occurrence and only based on the confession of accused persons, the petitioner has been added as accused. Hence, he seeks bail.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners in Crl.OP(MD)No.12007 of 2025 would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the first petitioner is the railway employee. The defacto complainant and his companion received a sum of Rs.10 lakhs from the first petitioner to meet out their loss in the share market. Despite several demand, they have not repaid the amount. When the petitioners came to Madurai from Trichy, the defacto complainant's brother voluntarily came along with the petitioners in a Car and promised that they will repay the amount immediately. Thereafter, the defacto complainant lodged the present complaint with intention to accuse the petitioners herein. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the petitioners are in custody from 28.06.2025 and 27.06.2025 respectively. Hence, they seek bail. 4/8

5.The learned counsel for the intervening petitioner raised strong objections to allow these petitions.

6.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that there existed money dispute between the parties. The defacto complainant and his companion received a sum of Rs.10 lakhs from the first petitioner to meet out their loss in the share market. Despite several demand, they have not repaid the amount. Due to that motive, on 26.06.2025 when the defacto complainant's brother was waiting at Old Vilangudi stop, A1 and A3 along with other accused persons came there and questioned about the defacto complainant and pushed him into the Car and also threatened him with knife point. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital. However, he objected to grant bail to the petitioners.

7.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that the injured was discharged from the hospital and material part of the investigation might have been completed and also considering the fact that the petitioners/Accused are in judicial custody from 28.06.2025 and 27.06.2025 respectively, taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, this 5/8

court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

8. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai 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 petitioners shall furnish their residential address and contact number to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai. If the petitioners changes their residential address, they shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV,Madurai ;

[c] the petitioners are directed to stay at Salem and appear before the Annadhanapatti police Station daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

6/8

[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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

9.Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. sd/- 18/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / 21/07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

das TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.IV, MADURAI.

2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI.

3.THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL, VIRUDHUNAGAR., 7/8

4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOODAL PUDHUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

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

COPY TO THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANNATHANAPATTI POLICE STATION, SALEM.

+1CC M/S.S.SEKAR ADVOCATE SR.7789 DT.18/07/2025 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD).Nos.11991 and 12007 of 2025and Crl.M.P(MD)No.9371 and 9431 of 2025 Date :18/07/2025 PR/21.07 .2025 8P/8C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 8/8