Allowed

Arunkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC19 Aug 2025CRL MP(MD)/10871/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought relaxation of a condition imposed in an earlier anticipatory bail order, stating they had been complying with the conditions regularly. The Government Advocate conceded compliance. The court relaxed the condition, directing petitioners to appear before police as and when required.

What did the court decide?

Condition in earlier bail order relaxed; petitioners to appear before respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

Arunkumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL MP(MD). No.10871 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19.08.2025

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI CRL MP(MD). No.10871 of 2025 in CRL OP(MD). No.6669 of 2025

¶5

1.Arunkumar S/o.Velmurugan 2.Sabari @ Manikandan S/o.Palanidurai

¶6

3.Muthuraja S/o.Seemaisamy ... Petitioners/Petitioners Vs

¶7

The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thiruppachetti Police Station, Sivagangai District.. (Crime No.73 of 2025). ... Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.PNSSM.Ammaar Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶9

PETITION FOR RELAXATION Under Sec.528 of BNSS.

¶10

PRAYER :- To relax the condition imposed in Crl.M.P.(MD).No.7707 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6669 of 2025, dated 24.06.2025 on the file of this Court. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶11

This petition has been filed to relax the condition imposed on the petitioners in

¶12

1/3

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

CRL MP(MD). No.10871 of 2025

¶15

Crl.M.P.(MD).No.7707 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6669 of 2025, dated 24.06.2025.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have

¶17

been complying with the conditions imposed by this court regularly and he prays for relaxation of the said condition.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioners have complied with the condition regularly.

¶19

Considering the nature of offence, the condition imposed by this Court, in in Crl.M.P.(MD).No.7707 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6669 of 2025, dated 24.06.2025 is relaxed and the petitioners shall appear before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.

¶20

sd/19/08/2025

¶21

/ TRUE COPY /

¶22

/09/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶23

vsg TO

¶24

1.The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam, Sivagangai.

¶25

2/3

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

CRL MP(MD). No.10871 of 2025

¶28

2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppachetti Police Station, Sivagangai District.

¶29

3.The Inspector of Police, Thirumaiyam Police Station, Pudukottai.

¶30

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶31

ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.10871 of 2025 IN CRL OP(MD) No.6669 of 2025 Date :19/08/2025

¶32

SBN/09.09.2025 3P/5C

¶33

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶34

3/3

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Arunkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arunkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Nagarajan Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.by

V.Pandi Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Balaji Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Murugan Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep by The Inspector of Police

Prabhakaran Vs The State of Tamilnadu