K.Tamil Selvan v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18.11.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD) No.17216 of 2025 K.Tamil Selvan ... Petitioner/ Accused No.1 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by the Inspector of Police, Dindigul Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.542/2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P.Manikandan For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.542 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 324(4), 351(3) of BNS, and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.542 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner went to the defacto complainant's home and threatened him. Hence, the complaint.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police.

4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has given a complaint to the respondent police, without taking the same on file, a counter complaint was taken on file and FIR was registered against the petitioner. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that this Court had earlier granted interim anticipatory bail and that the petitioner cooperated with the investigation.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted a status 2/6

report stating that the petitioner appeared before the respondent police and co-operated with the investigation. However, further investigation is necessary for obtaining CCTV footages and other evidence. Considering the above facts, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, this Petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul, 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 Magistrate concerned 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;

3/6

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for investigation; (c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) 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 petitioners 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;

(f) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS 2023.

7. It is also stated in the status report that the petitioner has lodged a complaint against the defacto complainant. The respondent shall take the same into consideration and conduct a proper investigation, and 4/6

complete the investigation in accordance with law. According to the petitioner, the complaint is not only against the son of the defacto complainant but also against a few others. The respondent shall take this into consideration as well and investigate the matter properly. 18.11.2025 jbr To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul.

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

5/6

S.SRIMATHY, J.

jbr CRL OP(MD) No.17216 of 2025 18.11.2025 6/6