High Court · 2025

CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 24/04/2025PRESENTThe HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025Udahayakumar... Petitioner in Crl.O.P. (MD)No.7476 of 2025 - A6Seni @ Srinivasan... Petitioner in Crl.O.P. (MD)No.7480 of 2025 - A7 Vs.The State of Tamil NaduRep. by the Sub Inspector of Police,Thiruappathur Town Police Station,Sivagangai District.(Crime No.16 of 2025) ... Respondent in both Crl.O.Ps./ComplainantIn Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7476 of 2025 For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ilayaraja, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025In Crl.O.P.(MD).No.7480 of 2025 For Petitioner : Ms.M.Shunmalar, Advocate for Mr.Senthil Nathan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITIONS FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSCOMMON PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.16 of 2025 on the file of therespondent-Police.COMMON ORDER : The Court made the following common order :-These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed by the petitioners on22.04.2025 under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023,praying to grant bail.2. The petitioners/ Accused Nos.6 & 7 were arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 02.02.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 127(2), 103 and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 in Crime No.16 of2025 on the file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that there was a dispute between the son of thedefacto complainant and the friends of one Vivek with regard to the murder of thesaid Vivek. In connection with the same, on 30.01.2025, at about 6:00 p.m., a wordyquarrel arose between the son of the defacto complainant and one Rajesh @Boominathan at the Thiruppathur Bus Stand. Later, at about 9:00 p.m., while the2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025defacto complainant and her son were purchasing groceries near Anna Statue, fourpersons came running towards her son armed with a sword and an aruval, andattacked him. The defacto complainant raised an alarm, upon which one Ayub Khanand one Sivaprakash came to his rescue. On seeing them, the accused persons fled thescene. The son of the defacto complainant was then taken to Madurai Rajaji Hospital,where he was declared dead. Hence, the case.4. Mr.R.Ilayaraja and Ms.M.Shunmalar, learned counsel appearing for thepetitioners, submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged bythe prosecution and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. They furthersubmit that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 02.02.2025 and areready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. They thereforepray for granting bail to the petitioners.5. Per contra, Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned Additional Public Prosecutorappearing for the respondent-police, submits that there are totally eight accusedpersons in this case. He further submits that the petitioners surrounded the deceasedon the spot and the co-accused persons attacked the deceased with a sword andaruval. He further submits that if bail is granted to the petitioners, they may causethreat to the defacto complainant and the witnesses. He further submits that there aretwo previous cases against the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7476 of 2025 (Accused3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025No.6), which relate to offences punishable under the NDPS Act, and that there is noprevious case against the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7480 of 2025 (Accused No.7).Hence, he vehemently opposes to grant bail to the petitioners.6. Heard on both sides and perused the records.7. The petitioners were arrested and have been in judicial custody since02.02.2025. In view of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners andconsidering the period of incarceration, this Court is of the opinion that furthercustody of the petitioners is not necessary for the Investigating Agency in this case.Further, the petitioners have permanent residence, and therefore, there is lesspossibility of absconding. Considering the same and with a view to give anopportunity to reform themselves, this Court is inclined to grant an order of bail tothe petitioners, however, subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, bail is granted tothe petitioners subject to the following conditions:(i) The petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty FiveThousand only) each along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned JudicialMagistrate, Thiruppathur, Sivagangai District;(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025Practice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur, Sivagangai District,shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;(iii) The petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile number tothe learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur, Sivagangai District;(iv) The petitioners shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at10.30 a.m., until further orders;(v) The petitioners shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond tobe executed under Chapter XXXV of BNS, 2023;(vi) The petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of whichthey are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected;(vii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade themfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with theevidence;(viii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to thedefacto complainant and also the witnesses; and(ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned JudicialMagistrate, Thiruppathur, Sivagangai District, is entitled to pass appropriate ordersagainst the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State ofKerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283]. 8. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions stand allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 24/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TSGTO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,THIRUPPATHUR, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIALMAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE,DISTRICT PRISON, RAMANATHAPURAM.4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,THIRUAPPATHUR TOWN POLICE STATION,SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.R.ILAYARAJA, Advocate ( SR-4716[I] dated 24/04/2025 )6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025+1 CC to M/s.B.SENTHILNATHAN, Advocate ( SR-4717[I] dated 24/04/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP (MD) Nos.7476 & 7480 of 2025 Date :24/04/2025SA/SAR. /24.04.2025/7P/8CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 7/7