High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 18/07/2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAICRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025andCRL MP(MD). No.9287 of 20251.Pandiyan,S/o.Thirumaran2.Vijayananth,S/o.Muthuvijayan3.Karthick,S/o.Rajamanickam4.Anbalagan,S/o.Vellaiyamoorthi5.Masilamani,S/o.Krishnan6.Anandan,S/o.Palani7.Velayutham,S/o.Velu ... Petitioners/A1, A3 to A7 & A9 Vs1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025The State of Tamil Nadu,Rep. by, the Inspector of Police,Keeramangalam Police Station,Pudukkottai District.(Crime No.96 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.B.Mohan Kumar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.Maheswaran R, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSSPRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.96 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1, A3 to A7 & A9, who apprehend arrest at the hands of therespondent police for the offences initially punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3),126(2), 296(b), 118(1), 324(4), 351(3) and 49 of BNS, 2023 and subsequently altered toSections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 296(b), 118(1), 324(4), 351(3), 49 and 109 of BNS, 2023in Crime No.96 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 20252. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant's wife is a doctorpracticing at Keeramangalam and is learning to drive a car. To monitor her driving,the de-facto complainant used to follow her in a separate vehicle. On 03.07.2025, ataround 08.15 p.m., while he was following his wife’s car on KeeramangalamSannathi Road, his vehicle was intercepted by the accused persons, who were armedwith sickles. They began to damage the car windows, and two of them attempted toattack him with sickles. The accused also used obscene language, criminallyintimidated the de-facto complainant, and warned him not to oppose one Pandian,who is the relative of the de-facto complainant. Hence, the present case has beenregistered. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that thepetitioners are innocent persons and they have not involved in any offences asstated by the prosecution. Due to political motive, the petitioners have been falselyimplicated in this case. In fact, the 1st petitioner was at abroad at the time of allegedoccurrence. He, however, submitted that the petitioners are willing to abide by anyconditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail forthe petitioners.3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 20254. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the accused personsbrutally attacked the de-facto complainant with sickles, causing grievous cut injurieson his right upper arm and wrist. He submitted that it was only at the instigation ofthe 1st accused that the other accused committed the present offence. He furtherstated that the 1st accused has several previous criminal antecedents and significantinfluence in the locality. If the accused are released on anticipatory bail, they arelikely to tamper with the witnesses. Hence, he strongly opposed to grantanticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submits that the petitionershave been arrayed as A1, A3 to A7 & A9. A2 and A8 were arrested andsubsequently released on bail. There are twelve previous cases registered against the1st petitioner/A1. He further submitted that the injured has been discharged fromthe hospital. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and thenature of the offence, the specific overt act against the 1st petitioner, and also takingnote of the fact that there are twelve previous cases registered against the 1stpetitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 1st petitioner at4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025this stage. However, considering the fact that the injured has been discharged fromthe hospital, and that two of the co-accused were arrested and subsequentlyreleased on bail, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 2nd to 7thpetitioners, subject to certain conditions.7. Accordingly, the 2nd to 7th petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in theevent of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the dateon which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif cumJudicial Magistrate, Alangudi on condition that the 2nd to 7th petitioners shall executea bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two suretieseach for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officerwho intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cumJudicial Magistrate, Alangudi, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shallstand dismissed and on further condition that:(a) the 2nd to 7th petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs andleft thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy oftheir Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;(b) the 2nd to 7th petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobilenumber to the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi. In the5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025event of any change in their residential address, the 2nd to 7th petitioners shall reportthe same to the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi;(c) the 2nd to 7th petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at10.30 a.m. until further orders;(d) the 2nd to 7th petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness eitherduring investigation or trial;(e) the 2nd to 7th petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation ortrial;(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the 2nd to 7th petitioners inaccordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 2nd to 7thpetitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court themselves as laiddown by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW5560] and;(g) if the accused/the 2nd to 7th petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR canbe registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as against the 1st6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025petitioner and is allowed as against the 2nd to 7th petitioners. Consequently, theconnected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed. sd/- 18/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.MKNTO1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,ALANGUDI.2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KEERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION,PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.+1. CC to B.MOHAN KUMAR (509/2013) Advocate SR.No.7811 (I) DT.18/07/2025 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.11843 of 2025 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11843 of 2025 Date :18/07/2025 NM/25.07.2025/ 8P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from17/07/2023 8/8