High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 22.01.2025PRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESHCRL OP(MD). No.678 of 20251. N.Kaleeswaran2. Suresh ... Petitioners / Accused No.2 & 4 VsThe State of Tamil Nadurepresented by The Inspector of Police,Thiruppachethi Police Station,Sivagangai District.(Crime No.210 of 2024) ... Respondent / Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.K.Dinesh Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITIONS FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.210 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police.ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners / Accused No.2 & 4, who were arrested and remanded to judicial1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 2025custody on 26.11.2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of BNSAct, in Crime No.210 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 26.11.2024, during the regular patrolvehicle checkup at Madurai – Rameswaram High Road, six persons were found in afour wheeler and they were found in possession of deadly weapons and they wereplanning to commit dacoity and on seeing the police, they attempted to escape fromthe spot and they were all apprehended. There are totally six accused persons in thiscase and the petitioners are arrayed as A2 and A4.3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that an FIR was registeredby the Palladam Police in Crime No.763 of 2024 for the offence of murder and thesepetitioners were arrayed as accused and they were arrested and remanded to JudicialCustody. There petitioners filed bail application before the concerned Court and bailwas granted by an order dated 11.11.2024 and certain conditions were imposed andone of the condition is that the petitioners will have to report before the PalladamPolice Station daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of thirty days. The petitioners alsocomplied the condition from 19.11.2024 onwards. Whileso, all of a sudden, thepetitioners were forcibly taken away from Palladam to Sivagangai on 25.11.2024 anda false case has been put up against the petitioners and they were produced beforethe Magistrate and they were remanded to Judicial Custody. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 20254. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, no suchincident took place as projected by the respondent police and a false case has beenfoisted against the petitioner.5. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that,petitioners were supposed to report before the Palladam Police Station for a period ofthirty days daily at 10.00.a.m., however this condition was complied with by thepetitioners from 19.11.2024 to 24.11.2024. Thereafter, they had illegally come toSivagangai and joined with other accused persons and they were planning to commitdacoity.6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, there are sixprevious cases pending against the 1st petitioner and there are three previous casespending against the 2nd petitioner and they are repeat offendors, who did not complywith the condition before the Palladam Police station and chose to commit yetanother offence by entering into Sivagangai.7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that, steps havealready been taken to file an application for cancellation of bail granted in favour ofthe petitioners at Palladam. 8. In view of the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehementlyopposed grant of bail to the petitioners.3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 20259. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material records ofthe case.10. Petitioners were accused in Crime No.783 of 2024 which was pendingbefore the Palladam Police Station. When they were granted bail, petitioners weredirected to report before the Palladam Police Station daily at 10.00.a.m., for a periodof thirty days. This condition was complied from 19.11.2024 to 24.11.2024.11. The case of the petitioners is that, they were forcibly taken from Palladam toSivagangai and that a false case has been foisted against them. However, the case ofthe prosecution is that, the petitioners entered Sivagangai illegally in order tocommit dacoity and also they did not comply the condition imposed by the PalladamCourt and thereby they are not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 12. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case andconsidering the manner in which the prosecution has projected the case andconsidering the nature of defence that has been taken by the learned counsel for thepetitioners and considering the period of incarceration ie from 26.11.2024, this Courtis inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. It is made clear that, order passed in thiscase will not stand in the way moving the application for cancellation of bail inCrime No.763 of 2024, which will be dealt with on its own merits and in accordancewith law.4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 202513. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on hisexecuting a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with twosureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial MagistrateCourt, Thirupuvanam, Sivagangai, and on further conditions that:-[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in thesurety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank passBook to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioners shall report before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court,Thirupuvanam, Sivagangai daily at 10.30.a.m., and report before the Palladam PoliceStation every Saturday and Sunday at 10.30.a.m., for a period of thirty days andthereafter before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation 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/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 2025[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 of BNS, 2023. sd/- 22/01/2025 / TRUE COPY / 22 / 01 /2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. SMATO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRTETHIRUPUVANAM, SIVAGANGAI.2 DO-THROUGHTHE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,THIRUPPACHETHI POLICE STATION,SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT,4 THE SUPERINTENDENTCENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI DISTRICT.5. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. COPY TOTHE INSPECTER OF POLICEPALLADAM POLICE STATION.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.678 of 2025+1 CC to M/s.K.DINESH, Advocate ( SR-653[I] dated 22/01/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.678 of 2025 Date :22/01/2025PSP/ /SAR /22.01.2025/ 7P/ 7CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/20237/7