Raja v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Uvari
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19.11.2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.20580 of 2025
1. Raja
2. Rohith @ Revanth ... Petitioners/ Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The Inspector of Police, Uvari Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.271 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ashok For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahayar Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS Act 2023.
PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.271 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.
1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 78, 79, 351(2) of BNS r/w Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.271 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had misbehaved with the daughter of the defacto complainant and the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioners had threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that due to some dispute, a false case has been given. He further submitted that the petitioners are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail for the petitioners. 2/7
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are no previous case pending against the petitioners. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that no one was sustained injuries, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions. 6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a separate 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 learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which, the order copy was made ready and on further conditions that: [a]the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity; 3/7
[b] the petitioners shall residing at Chennai, therefore, the petitioners shall report before the Inspector of Police, Triplicane Police Station, Chennai, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.
[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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners are 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.
(S S Y J) 19.11.2025 msrm 4/7
To 1.The learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram.
2.The Inspector of Police, Uvari Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4. The Inspector of Police Triplicane Police Station, Chennai.
5/7
S.SRIMATHY,J msrm
ORDER
IN 6/7
19.11.2025 7/7