Vanmuthu v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05/08/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI and CRL MP(MD).No.10387 of 2025 Vanmuthu, S/o.Saravanan, ..Petitioner/ Accused No.1 Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Kalakkad Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.523 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.C.Susikumar Advocate.
For Intervener : M/s.S.Meena For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.523 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 308(5), 109 (1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.523 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, 1/5
seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that this petitioner is the known person to the defacto-complainant. On 19.07.2025, this petitioner asked Rs.2000/- from the defacto-complainant for the expenses since no one gave money to him after the release of him from the jail and the defacto-complainant told that he has no money. The second accused who is the friend of the petitioner saw the money kept in the packet of the defacto-complainant and picked quarrel with him and attempted to take away Rs.2,000/- from the packet and the same was prevented by the defactocomplainant. Hence, the petitioner attacked the defacto-complainant with Aruval, attempted his life, but he narrowly escaped unhurt and both of them threatened the defacto-complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 19.07.2025, nearly 12 days. Hence, he seeks bail.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the intervening petitioner would submit that no such occurrence was happened, the defacto-complainant never lodged any complaint against this petitioner and other accused. This petitioner never demanded 2/5
or robbed any amount from the petitioner. The respondent police had obtained signature in the blank paper and registered the case against the petitioner. The Defacto-complainant has no objection to grant bail to this petitioner.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit this petitioner and other accused demanded and robbed Rs.2000/- from the defactocomplainant. The petitioner/Accused No.1 is having six previous cases. Hence, he objected to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that in this case, this petitioner was arrested on 19.07.2025, by this time most of the investigation might have been completed, at the time of occurrence no one sustained injury, the petitioner/accused No.1 is in judicial custody from 19.07.2025, taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri and on further conditions that :- 3/5
[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 contact number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri. If the petitioner changes his residential address, he shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri; [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.
[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 BNS.
4/5
8. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. sd/- 05/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / 05/08/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
gvn TO : - 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri.
2.Do Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli.
3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai. 4.The Inspector of Police, Kalakkad Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.12984 of 2025 Date :05/08/2025 SBN/05.08.2025 5P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5