V. Vijay v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/08/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI V.Vijay, S/o.Veerapandi Mookaiah ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by, the Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.254 of 2025) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Manikandan, S/o.Nagarajan Raja ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar, Advocate For R1 : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : No Appearance PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.254 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent 1/5

police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 329(4) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 r/w. Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003 in Crime No.254 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The name of the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant has been printed in the cause list. Despite his name has been printed in the cause list, the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant has neither entered appearance through a counsel nor in-person to oppose the present petition.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is running a business in Ambasamudram. He had borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from the petitioner as a loan for his business. The de-facto complainant did not pay interest for two months, as the petitioner demanded exorbitant interest. On 20.06.2025, the petitioner went to the house of the de-facto complainant, threatened his mother and sister with an iron rod to settle the borrowed amount along with huge interest, and abused them using filthy language. Hence, a case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He submitted that since the de-facto complainant has been dragging on the repayment of the amount, the petitioner only requested that the amount be 2/5

settled at the earliest, as he has been facing pressure from his relatives and friends. At this juncture, in order to evade repayment, the de-facto complainant has lodged the present false complaint against the petitioner. He further 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 (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner is the sole accused in this case. He further submitted that no one sustained any injuries due to the incident. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, and taking note of the fact that no one sustained any injuries due to the incident, and that the issue appears to be a civil in nature, and that as the date of registration of FIR is 26.06.2025, by this time most of the investigation might have been completed, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary at this stage, 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, Ambasamudram, 3/5

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, Ambasamudram, 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, Ambasamudram. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram;

(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 4/5

law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court herself 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/- 18/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / /09/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

mkn TO 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram.

2.The Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12410 of 2025 Date :18/08/2025 SBN/10.09.2025 5P/4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5