Suyambu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 13.10.2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.17371 of 2025 1.Suyambu 2.Aswin 3.Annaselvam 4.Theivakani ...Petitioners Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represent by the Inspector of Police, Koodankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.465 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioners : Mr.P.Saravanakumar 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.465 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
ORDER: The Court made the following order :- 1/6
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 74 and 351(2) of BNS and Section 4 of the TNPHW Act in Crime No.465 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 13.08.2025, at about 7.40 a.m., when the defacto-complainant went to a shop buy milk, A-1/Suyambu, with whom there existed a prior dispute to regarding temple affairs, allegedly used obscene language against her. When the defacto-complainant questioned him about the same, the said Suvambu/A-1 is stated to have torn the defactocomplainant's nightdress and assaulted her.
Furthermore, it is alleged that Suyambu's son, Ashwin/A-2, Annaselvam/A-3, and one Theivakani/A-4 also assaulted the defacto-complainant with their hands, pulled her hair, and beat her. When the bystanders intervened, the accused are said to have threatened her and left the scene. The defacto-complainant was thereafter admitted to the Koodankulam Government Hospital for treatment. Hence, a case has been registered as against the petitioner.
2/6
3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the injured discharged from the hospital. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the injured discharged from the hospital this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.
their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity. [b]the 2nd petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and the 1, 3 & 4 petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. [c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d]the petitioners 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 petitioner is 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].
[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
13.10.2025 KSA 4/6
TO 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Radhapuram. 2.The Inspector of Police, Koodankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
S.SRIMATHY,J KSA
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.17371 of 2025 Date : 13.10.2025 6/6