High Court · 2025

CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 28/04/2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 20251. R.Rakesh2. J.Ayyappan ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 & 2 Vs.The State of Tamil NaduRep. by the Inspector of Police,Sivagiri Police Station,Tenkasi District.(Crime No.171 of 2025) ... Respondent/ComplainantFor petitioners: Mr.K.Karansingh AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS, 2023PRAYER :-For Bail in Crime No.171 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent-Police.ORDER : The Court made the following order :-1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 2025This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners on 24.04.2025under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying togrant bail.2. The petitioners /A4 and A2 were arrested and remanded to judicial custodyon 31.03.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 132 and 351(3) ofBharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(A) of NarcoticDrugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and 25(1A) of Arms Act, 1959 in CrimeNo.171 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that, based on secret information, on31.03.2025, at about 03:00 p.m., while the respondent-police were conductingsurveillance near Draupadi Amman Temple, Sivagiri, they found Accused No.1handing over something from a polythene bag to an unknown person. On seeing therespondent-police, the said unknown person fled from the place. Accused No.1 andthe second petitioner (A2) were standing with their vehicle bearing RegistrationNo.TN-92-K-9724. While the respondent-police were trying to apprehend them, theyabused the police officials in abusive language in front of the public. Accused No.1,taking an arval (sickle) from the two-wheeler, threatened the police officials andwarned them not to arrest them. However, the respondent-police apprehended them.2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 2025Upon verification and search, it was revealed that they were in possession of 50grams of ganja and Rs.500/- earned through the sale of ganja. The police arrestedthem and seized the contraband, the vehicle, and the said amount from them. Basedon their confession, the first petitioner has been arrayed as (A4). Hence, the case.4. Mr.K.Karansingh, learned counsel appearing 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 further submits that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since31.03.2025 and are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by thisCourt. He therefore prays to grant bail to the petitioners.5. Per contra, Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned Additional Public Prosecutorappearing for the respondent-police, submits that Accused No.1 and the secondpetitioner (A2) were found in possession of 50 grams of ganja, and that the firstpetitioner (A4) is connected with the crime. He further submits that there are noprevious cases pending against the first petitioner (A4), whereas two previous casesare pending against the second petitioner (A2). He also submits that the investigationin the present case is still pending, and therefore, at this stage, if bail is granted to thepetitioners, they may abscond, thereby causing delay in the investigation and mayalso commit similar offences, thereby endangering the health of the general public.3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 2025Therefore, he vehemently opposes to grant bail to the petitioners.6. Heard on both sides and perused the records.7. The petitioners were arrested on 31.03.2025 and have been in judicial custodysince then. In view of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners and the factthat the two-wheeler and contraband have been recovered from the petitioners, thisCourt is of the opinion that further custody of the petitioners is not necessary for theInvestigation Agency in this case. Considering the same and also considering theperiod of incarceration and with a view to give one more opportunity to thepetitioners to reform themselves, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners,however, subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, bail is granted to the petitionerssubject to the following conditions:(i) Each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees TenThousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- (RupeesTen Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Musif - Cum- Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri;(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 Additional District Musif - Cum - Judicial Magistrate,Sivagiri shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 2025(iii) The petitioners shall furnish his residential address and mobile number tothe learned Additional District Musif - Cum - Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri; (iv) The petitioners shall appear and sign before the learned Additional DistrictMusif - Cum - Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, on all working days, at 10.00 am and 5.00pm 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; and(viii) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learnedAdditional District Musif - Cum - Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri is entitled to passappropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if theaforementioned conditions are imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 20258. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 28/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TRPTO1 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,SIVAGIRI.2 DO THROUGHTHE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TENKASI DISTRICT.3 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICESIVAGIRI POLICE STATION,TENKASI DISTRICT.5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7783 of 2025 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7783 of 2025 Date :28/04/2025 HPS/SAR / 29.04.2025/7P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from17/07/2023. 7/7