High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025DATED: 11.07.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMARCRL.O.P.No.18345 of 2025P VijayakumarPetitionerVsState Rep. By:The Inspector of PoliceEthappur Police Station, Salem District. Crime No. 280/2025.RespondentPRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 280 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent/ Complainant herein i.e., the Inspector of Police, Ethappur Police Station, Salem District.For Petitioner :Mr.D GokulFor Respondent :Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam,Government Advocate (Crl.side).ORDERThe petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 191(2), 191(3), 329(3), 324(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with 1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of harassment of Women Act 2002 in Crime No.280 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other persons has trespassed into the school of the defacto complainant by breaking its lock and when the same was questioned by the defacto complainant and her husband, they were assaulted by the petitioner and other accused. Due to which the defacto complainant sustained injury on her hand and was admitted in the hospital. Hence the case.3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and has been falsely implicated in this case. Moreso, a civil dispute is pending between the petitioner and defacto complainant's husband with regard to the school. He further submitted that without prejudice to his defence, the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the credit of Crime No.280 of 2025.4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor submits that the petitioner has no locus standi to enter into the defacto complainant's property. The petitioner along with 40 other henchmen entered the property of the defacto complainant and attacked the defacto complainant and also caused damages to the entire fencing of the property. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025anticipatory bail to the petitioner.5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that the petitioner along with others, attacked the defacto complainant, and also caused damages to the fencing of the school to the tune of Rs.30,000/-. He further submits that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides and taking note of the nature of the allegations and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.280 of 2025 and the trial Court shall deposit the same in an interest bearing account and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on their executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Aathur, Salem District and on further conditions that:[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025stand automatically cancelled; [b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required;[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;;[f] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] The petitioner shall not interfere with the property of the defacto complainant and to that effect an undertaking shall also be filed by the petitioner;[h] On breach of any of the aforementioned 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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)13 SCC 283];[i] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.11-07-2025epIndex:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025To1.The Inspector of PoliceEthappur Police Station, Salem District.2.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Aathur, Salem District.3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.epCRL.O.P.No.18345 of 2025 11.07.20257/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.This matter is posted today under the caption 'For being mentioned' at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the prosecution is that at the instance of the petitioner, one Sadayappan and 40 others have trespassed into the land of the defacto complainant but in the order, it was mentioned that the petitioner along with others has trespassed into the land of the defacto complainant.3. In view of the same, necessary corrections to be carried out in the order as follows:- i) In the 1st line of 2nd paragraph of the order dated 11.07.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025, the expression “ the petitioner along with other persons” shall be replaced with “ at the instance of the petitioner one Sadayappan along with 40 others ”ii) the 4th paragraph of the order is hereby deleted in its entirety and the 5th paragraph shall be re-numbered as 4th paragraph which is modified as follows:-8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18345 of 2025M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.nr“4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submits that the petitioner along with 40 other henchmen entered the property of the defacto complainant and attacked the defacto complainant and also caused damages to the entire fencing of the property to the tune of Rs.30,000/- He further submits that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner”. The remaining paragraphs of the order namely Paragraph Nos.6 and 7 shall be re-numbered as Paragraph Nos. 5 and 6.4. Registry is directed to issue fresh order copy by incorporating the above said changes.24.07.2025nrCrl.O.P.No.18345 of 20259/9