✦ Madras High Court

Meeyakhan v. State of Tamil Nadu

3 min read

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 44. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that no onewas sustained injuries and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. He further submitted that the investigation is almost completed. However, heopposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.10545…

Judgment

Cause title

CRL OP(MD).No.10545 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 25/06/2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAICRL OP(MD).No.10545 of 2025 Meeyakhan .. Petitioner

/Sole Accused VsState of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Pathamadai Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.149 of 2025) .. Respondent

/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Sathyachidambaram For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSSPRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.149 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.10545 of 2025

ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent policefor the offences punishable under Sections 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 1998, in CrimeNo.149 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defactocomplainant are relatives and on 16.06.2025, there was a wordy quarrel betweenthem, as a result of which, the petitioner had abused in filthy language and attackedthe defacto complainant with his hands and caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aninnocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by theprosecution. He further submitted that there is no previous case pending against thepetitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide byany conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatorybail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that no onewas sustained injuries and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. He further submitted that the investigation is almost completed. However, heopposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.10545 of 20255. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that noone was sustained injuries and the investigation is almost completed and there is noprevious case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grantanticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event ofhis arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum ofRs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum tothe satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends toarrest or to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli, and on further conditions that: (a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs andleft thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtaina copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (b)the petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobilenumber to the Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District, In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shallreport the same to the Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.10545 of 2025 District.

(c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at10.30 a.m., until further orders. (d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness eitherduring investigation or trial; (e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation ortrial; (f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learnedMagistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against thepetitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposedand the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Courthimself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs.State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and; (g) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registeredunder Section 269 of BNS, 2023. sd/- 25/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.10545 of 2025msrmTo1.The Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.2. Do Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli District. 3. The Inspector of Police, Pathamadai Police Station, Tirunelveli District. 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.+1 CC to M/s.S.SATHYA CHIDAMBARAM, Advocate ( SR-6782[I] dated26/06/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10545 of 2025 Date :25/06/2025 HPS/10.07.2025 /5P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madras High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments