Suresh v. State by

O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for alleged offences punishable under Sections 296(b) & 351(2) of BNS and under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage & Loss) Act, 1992, in Crime No.233 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The prosecution case is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are auto-drivers. On 06.09.2025, due to previous enmity, the petitioner hit the defacto complainant's auto and caused damage to it.

¶3The Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not connected with the alleged offence, he has been falsely implicated and he will abide by any conditions imposed by this Court in the event anticipatory bail is granted.

¶4The Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterates the prosecution case and opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5Heard the Learned Counsels and perused the materials on record.

¶6Considering the submissions made by the Learned Counsel appearing on either sides and since custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on or before 30.09.2025 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate I, Villupuram on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:- [a] If the petitioner fail to surrender before the concerned Court on or before

30.09.2025, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled; [b] The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] The petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. [d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

15.09.2025 bsm To,

¶1The Judicial Magistrate -I, Villupuram

¶2The Inspector of Police, Villupuram Town Police Station, Villupuram.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Note :

¶1Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶2All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. bsm

15.09.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15.09.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Suresh. ... Petitioner/Accused /versus/ State by; The Inspector of Police, Villupuram Town Police Station, Villupuram District. (Crime No.233 of 2025) ...Complainant/Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest, pending investigation in Crime No.233 of 2025 on the file of the Villupuram Town Police Station, Villupuram District. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Ashok Kumar. For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)