High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 16/06/2025PRESENTThe HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAICRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025Tamilselvan, S/o.Kulanthai,Vakkampatti, Dindigul. ..Petitioner/ Accused No.2 VsThe State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police,Thaluk Police Station, Dindigul. (Crime No.313 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P.Manikandan Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.313 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.2, who was arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 04.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 189(2), 126(2), 296(b), 132, 351(3) of BNS altered into sections 191(2), 189(2), 126(2), 296(b), 132,351(3) of BNS 2023 and Section 3(1) of Tamilnadu Property (Prevention of Damageand Loss) Act, 1992 in Crime No.313 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police,seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that On 27.05.2025, while the resident Hindus ofVakkampatti Village have conducted Hindu Deities Festival, the resident Christiansof Vakkampatti stated that while crossing Hindu Deity Procession at the placesituated in front of Vakkampatti Mariamathalenal Temple, they should notbroadcast Hindu religious songs, firing of crackers and making any shouting, hencethere arose dispute between the two parties and at about 8.00p.m. On the same day,the accused persons unlawfully assembled themselves and sat in the Dindigul toBatlagundu main road as a result they obstructed the transportation in the said road2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025and thereby it was caused much difficultly to the public. The police officials arrivedat the spot and requested them to withdraw their road picket, the accused personsabused the police officials in filthy languages and threatened them with direconsequences by showing stones. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is noway connected with the alleged occurrence, there existed dispute between twoparties of Vakkampatti Village residents in respect of common pathway. On27.05.2025, a dispute was arose between two parties that if specific communitypeople celebrating festival, the Hindu Deity procession has not conducted the placesituated in front of Mariamathalenal Temple, after that dispute while the Hindupeople trying to make road obstruction, but that attempt was curtailed by the policeofficials. The petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offencesas alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide andconditions that may be imposed by this Court. There was one counter case in CrimeNo.314 of 2025 is pending. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custodyfrom 04.06.2025 nearly 11 days. Hence, he seeks bail.4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that on3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 202527.05.2025, while the resident Hindus of Vakkampatti Village have conductedHindu Deities Festival, the resident Christians of Vakkampatti stated that whilecrossing Hindu Deity Procession at the place situated in front of VakkampattiMariamathalenal Temple, they should not broadcast Hindu religious songs, firing ofcrackers and making any shouting, hence there arose dispute between the twoparties and at about 8.00p.m. On the same day, the accused persons unlawfullyassembled themselves and sat in the Dindigul to Batlagundu main road. The policeofficials were arrived at the spot and requested them to withdraw their road-roko,the accused persons abused the police officials in filthy languages and threatenedthem with dire consequences by showing stones and also damaged the policevehicle. There are totally 22 accused persons involved in this case, this petitionerwas arrayed at Accused No.2. At the instigation of this petitioner alone, group ofpeople unlawfully assembled and conducted road-roko. The allegations are seriousin nature, there was possibility of religion clash between the residents ofVakkampatti Village. There was one counter case in Crime No.314 of 2025 ispending. Hence, he strongly objected to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and alsotaking note of the fact that in this case, it appears that there was dispute regarding4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025usage of pathway, there was one counter case in Crime No.314 of 2025 is pendingbefore the respondent police, the petitioner/accused-2 remanded into judicialcustody on 04.06.2025, taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, thiscourt is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing abond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with twosureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate No.1, Dindiguland 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 petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.13,000/- (RupeesThirteen Thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.313 of 2025, without prejudiceto his defence before the trial Court; and on such deposit being made, the learnedJudicial Magistrate No.1, Dindigul shall accept the sureties furnished by thepetitioner;5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025[c] The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and contact number tothe Judicial Magistrate No.1, Dindigul. If the petitioner changes his residentialaddress, he shall report the same to the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Dindigul; [d] the petitioner shall stay at Salem and he shall appear and sign before theSalem Town Police Station, daily twice at 10.30 a.m and 5.30p.m. until furtherorders.[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.[f] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation or trial.[g] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].[h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 BNS. sd/- 16/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / 16/06/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. GVNTO1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, DINDIGUL 2. DO THROUGHTHE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.3. THE OFFICER INCHARGE,DISTRICT JAIL, RAMANATHAPURAM.4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DINDIGUL TALUK POLICE STATION, DINDIUGL. 5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SALEM TOWN POLICE STATION, SALEM. 6. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.9980 of 2025 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9980 of 2025 Date :16/06/2025 HPS/16.06.2025 /8P/7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 8/8