← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/14083/2025allowed

Thomas Antony Ravikumar v. The State Represented By

2025-08-26Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 26.08.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI Thomas Antony Ravikumar ... Petitioner/ Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.182 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.Muthuram For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.182 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 120B, 468, 471, 420 & 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.182 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant purchased some land in Survey No.339/1 to the extent of 28 cents situated at Gulavanigarpuram Village in favour of his wife in the year 2008. Further, the defacto complainant came to know that the accused Nos.2 & 3 said to have forged a Will and created fake power of attorney and executed a sale deed in the name of this petitioner to an extent of 8 cents belongs to the defacto complainant's wife. Later, when the defacto complainant questioned about the sale, the petitioner along with other accused persons said to have abused the defacto complainant and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner has purchased the property in the year 2010 and complaint was given only after 15 years. He further submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner and he is ready and 2/6

willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner and the investigation is almost completed. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that FIR came to be registered only on the direction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.5, Tirunelveli and also taking note of the fact the petitioner has purchased the property in the year 2010 and FIR was registered in the year 2025 after lapse of 15 years, the complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant and it is a civil dispute and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner and the investigation has been almost completed, 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 his arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.V, 3/6

Tirunelveli District, 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 to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.V, Tirunelveli District, and on further conditions 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 Court No.V, Tirunelveli District. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.V, Tirunelveli District.

(c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 06.30 p.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;

4/6

(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 thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

sd/- 26/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / /2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

msrm To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tirunelveli.

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

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

5/6

+1 CC to M/s.R.MUTHURAM, Advocate ( SR-9264[I] dated 28/08/2025 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14083 of 2025 Date :26/08/2025 HPS/16.09.2025 6P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6