P. Ramselva @ Selvavignesh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Chinnamanur

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD) NO. 19538 of 2025 P.Ramselva @ Selvavignesh ..Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs State Of Tamilnadu, Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Cinnamanur Police Station, Theni District.

(Crime No.531 of 2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Malaikani For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.531 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

1/8

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 196(1), 353(2) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.531 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner spread a news on face book stating that the defacto complainant running a sallun in the locality brain washing the people coming to the shop for religious conversion and people from Hindu Munnani issuing life threat to the defacto complainant. Hence, a case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He, 2/8

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

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submitted that there are thirteen previous case pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. It is seen that the defacto complainant has placed some books containing messages against Hindus and the deities which would hurt the religious sentiments of the Hindus. Also has propagated religious conversion. The petitioner is offended and hurt by the said messages in the books which was placed in the saloon and the act of the defacto complainant. Hence the petitioner has posted a message in the facebook. Infact the defacto complainant has instigated the religious 3/8

disharmony by placing the books which contains messages against non-Muslims especially Hindus.

6. The respondent prosecution is directed to initiate action against the defacto complainant for the instigating act of creating religious disharmony and for the act of conversion and proceed as per law.

7. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and inspite of thirteen previous cases pending against the petitioner, in the present case the petitioner's post is only reaction to the instigating act of the defacto complainant, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

8. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail 4/8

in the event of 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, Uthamapalayam, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition 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;

5/8

(b) the petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam; (c)the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m. For a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(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;

(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 6/8

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

06.11.2025 vsg To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam. 2.The Inspector Of Police, Cinnamanur Police Station, Theni District.

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

7/8

S.SRIMATHY.J., vsg Crl.O.P.(MD).No.19538 of 2025 Date : 06.11.2025 8/8