Hariharan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 13/08/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI and CRL MP(MD).No.10803 of 2025 Hariharan, S/o.Gopal, ..Petitioner/ Accused No.9 Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Bazaar Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.140 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Jeyakarthik Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanaga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi, Advocate PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.140 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. 1/7
ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.9, who was arrested and remanded into judicial custody on 02.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 109 of BNS @ under Sections.126(2), 296(b), 191(1), 191(2), 61(2) and 109(1) of BNS in Crime No.140 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto-complainant's husband namely Nirmal has running gym and TASMAC bar. Earlier, due to one another dispute, her husband was arrested and remanded into judicial custody and later, he was enlarged on bail. On 25.06.2025, at about 13.30hrs when the defacto-complainant's husband was proceeded towards his house from his bar by his two wheeler, the accused persons came in auto and they attacked the defacto-complainant by using deadly weapons, he sustained grievous injuries and his hand was amputated. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are totally 11 accused persons involved in this case. This petitioner was arrayed as ninth accused. This petitioner is not at all present at the scene of occurrence, based on the confession of A1, this petitioner name was arrayed as ninth accused. The respondent police lodged a false case against this petitioner. This petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is 2/7
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 02.07.2025, nearly 43 days. Hence, he seeks bail.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the intervener would submit that the defacto-complainant's husband is the victim who sustained grievous injuries and his left hand was amputated by the gruesome attack of the accused persons. In the result of the gruesome attack of the accused persons, the victim had sustained 23 cut injuries. The victim's left hand was amputate and his right leg was fractured. This petitioner informed the whereabouts the victim to the other accused persons. This petitioner so far spent more than Rs.20,00,000/- for his medical treatment. Now, the petitioner has also facing life threat. If the petitioner/accused No.9 is released on bail he will threaten and tamper the witnesses. Hence, he prays to dismiss the present bail petition.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that there are totally 11 accused persons were involved in this case. This petitioner was arrayed as ninth accused. In this case, Accused Nos.1,2,3 and 6 were arrested on 27.06.2025, Accused Nos.5,7 and 9 were surrendered and they are in judicial custody from 02.07.2025 and the Accused Nos.8 and 10 were absconding. The accused persons brutally attacked the defacto-complainant's husband, he had sustained 17 cut injuries 3/7
all over his body, his left hand was amputated and his right leg was fractured. At the time of occurrence, this petitioner informed the whereabouts of the victim, except that allegations there is no specific overtatct against this petitioner. There is no previous case against this petitioner. In this case, Accused No.3 was enlarged on bail by the Juvenile Justice Board in Crl.MP.No.209/2025. The Injured persons discharged from hospital on 08.07.2025. The offences committed by the accused persons are grave in nature. If the petitioner released on bail, there is every possibility to threaten the witnesses and tamper the evidences. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that there is only limited overtact against this petitioner, this petitioner only gave information regarding the victim before and after the occurrence, the injured person discharged from hospital on 08.07.2025, there is no previous case against this petitioner, the petitioner/accused No.9 is in judicial custody from 02.07.2025, 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate Court 4/7
No.1, Ramanathapuram 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 petitioner shall furnish his residential address and contact number to the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Ramanathapuram. If the petitioner changes his residential address, he shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Ramanathapuram;
[c] the petitioner shall stay at Madurai and he shall appear and sign before the Inspector of Police, Tallakulam Police Station daily twice at 10.00a.m., and 05.00p.m. until further orders.
[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]. 5/7
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
8. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. sd/- 13/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / 13/08/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
gvn TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, RAMANATHAPURAM. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT JAIL, RAMANATHAPURAM. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BAZAAR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM.
5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TALLAKULAM POLICE STATION. 6 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1 CC to M/s.D.BALAMURUGAPANDI, Advocate ( SR-8763[I] dated 13/08/2025 ) +1 CC to M/s.M.S.JEYAKARTHIK, Advocate ( SR-8768[I] dated 13/08/2025 ) 6/7
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.13113 of 2025 Date :13/08/2025 NBF/SAR- /13/08/2025/ 7P/9C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7