High Court · 2025

CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 08.04.2025PRESENTTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVELCRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 20251.Elumalai... Petitioner No.1 / A12.Ramayee3.Bhuvaneswaran4.Subatharani... Petitioner Nos.2 to 45.Elangovan... Petitioner No.5 / A26.Prabakaran... Petitioner No.6 / A37.Malarkodi... Petitioner No.7 Vs.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. byThe Inspector of Police,Vaiyampatti Police Station,Trichy District.(Crime No.40 of 2025)... Respondent/ ComplainantAmended as per the order of this Court dated27.02.2025 in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.2702 of 20251/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 2025PRAYER :- The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to grant pre-arrest bail to thepetitioners in Crime No.40 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.For Petitioners : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)ORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners on 17.02.2025under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, prayingto grant an order of pre-arrest bail.2. After three days from the date of filing of this Criminal Original Petition,i.e., on 20.02.2025, the petitioners filed a miscellaneous petition stating that thesecond to fourth and seventh petitioners were not arrayed as accused in the FirstInformation Report, and sought amendment of the cause title as well as the CrimeNumber and sections of offence. This Court, by an order dated 27.02.2025, allowedthe said petition. In view of the above, this petition is not maintainable as far as thesecond to fourth and seventh petitioners are concerned. For the sake of convenience,hereinafter, the remaining petitioners shall be referred to as ‘petitioners’. It is made2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 2025clear that the term ‘petitioners’ in the following paragraphs refers only to the first,fifth, and sixth petitioners / A1 to A3. 3. The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent-police forthe offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya NyayaSanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment ofWomen Act, 2002, in Crime No.40 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.4. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and thepetitioners are neighbours, and there was a dispute between the two familiesregarding the use of a cement road for walking. In this context, there is a vacant sitelocated near their residential properties, which both parties have been using as aparking space. On 10.02.2025, at about 06:30 p.m., when the defacto complainantwas returning from college, her aunt's son parked his car near a two-wheelerbelonging to the petitioners. A dispute arose over the parking, leading to a wordyquarrel between them. During the said quarrel, Accused No.1 allegedly attacked thedefacto complainant’s aunt’s son with a wooden log. While attempting to safeguardhim, the defacto complainant was also attacked by the other accused persons. Atthat time, the family members of the defacto complainant arrived at the scene.Thereafter, a scuffle ensued between the two groups. The petitioners allegedlyattacked all of them, abused them using filthy language, and threatened with dire3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 2025consequences. The defacto complainant was admitted in the hospital. Therespondent-police, upon receiving statement from the injured, registered the presentcase.5. Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits thatthe petitioners are innocent persons, that they have not committed any offence asalleged by the prosecution and that a false case has been foisted against thepetitioners. He however submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by anyconditions that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to grant anorder of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.6. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, the learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that due to previousenmity between the parties, the accused persons abused the defacto complainantand her family members in filthy language, assaulted them and threatened themwith dire consequences. He further submits that the defacto complainant wasadmitted in the hospital on 01.03.2025 and discharged on 09.03.2025. He howeversubmits that, if the pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioners, they will again causethreat to the defacto complainant and her family members. Accordingly, he prays todismiss this Criminal Original Petition. 7. Heard on both sides and perused the records. 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 20258. In view of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners and thenature of dispute between two parties and taking note of the fact that the injuredwas discharged from hospital, this Court is of the opinion that custodialinterrogation of the petitioners is not necessary for the Investigating Agency in thiscase. Further, the petitioners have permanent residence and deep roots in thesociety. Hence, there is less possibility of absconding. Considering the same andwith a view to give an opportunity to the petitioners to reform themselves, thisCourt is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, pre-arrestbail is granted to the petitioners subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of theirarrest or in the event of their surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate,Manapparai, within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy ismade ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousandonly) each along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees TenThousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai.(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules ofPractice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one ofidentity proofs to ensure their identity.5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 2025(iii) The petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile numberto the concerned Judicial Magistrate.(iv) The petitioners shall appear and sign before the learned JudicialMagistrate, Manapparai weekly thrice i.e., on every Monday, Wednesday andFriday at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.(v) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by apolice officer as and when required.(vi) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement,threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as todissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.(vii) The petitioners shall also not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to thedefacto complainant, her family members and witnesses and shall not tamper theevidence.(viii) The petitioners shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house orher college.(ix) The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission ofthe concerned Court.(x) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned JudicialMagistrate or Trial Court, as the case may be, is entitled to pass appropriate orders6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 2025against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditionsare imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs.State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283]. 9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed as far as the first,fifth and sixth petitioners are concerned subject to the conditions stated supra and isdismissed as far as the second to fourth and seventh respondents are concerned. sd/- 08/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (CS-I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. PALTO1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANAPPARAI.2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIYAMPATTI POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP (MD) No.3063 of 20254.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.3063 of 2025 Date :08/04/2025 PR/30.04 .2025 8P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 8/8