Javith @ Mohamed Javith v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29/10/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Javith @ Mohamed Javith ... Petitioner/A11 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thiruppullani Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.87 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Jaya Vasanthan S, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.87 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/4
The petitioner/A11, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 189(2), 140(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), and 238 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.87 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 and A2 took the deceased on their two wheeler threatened him demanding money and later he was found dead at the seashore of Thinaikulam Nadar Kudiyiruppu. Hence, the case was altered from 194 BNS to 103(1) of BNS. During investigation, A1 had confessed that he along with 10 other accused attacked the deceased as a result the deceased was found dead in the next morning. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks 2/4
anticipatory bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor contended that initially FIR was filed for 'man missing'. Subsequently, based on the confession, it was found that the petitioner has specific overtact in the said crime. Moreover, A1, A2 &A3 were arrested and released on bail. 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 it is a case of 302 IPC offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
29.10.2025 PJL To 1.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppullanni Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 3/4
S.SRIMATHY,J PJL
ORDER
IN 29.10.2025 4/4