Madasamy @ Duraipandi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by

The petitioner /A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS and Section 25(1-A) of Arms Act, in Crime No.849 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶22

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is working in a Chicken Shop nearby his house. On 10.07.2025 at about 08.30 pm, the petitioner has come to the defacto complainant's shop, enquired the price and quarreled with him. Thereafter, at 09.00 pm, the petitioner again came to be shop along with other accused person/A2, abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and attacked him with aruval and also caused injuries. When the same was prevented by the defacto complainant's mother, the second accused attacked her and also criminally intimidated them. Hence, the complaint.

¶23

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. The petitioner is in custody from 17.07.2025 and hence, he seeks bail.

¶24

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that there are

¶25

2/5

¶26

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

¶27

CRL OP(MD).No.13664 of 2025

¶28

totally two accused persons involved in this case. The petitioner has been arrayed as A1. The defacto complainant is running a chicken shop. The petitioner went to the defacto complainant's shop and inquired about the price of a roasted chicken piece. The defacto complainant informed him that one piece costs Rs.15/- and two pieces cost Rs.25/-. However, the petitioner refused to pay Rs.15/- and argued that other shops sell it for Rs.10/- and he questioned why the defacto complainant was charging Rs.15/-. Due to which, there arose wordy quarrel between them. The petitioner and other accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also attacked him with aruval and caused injuries. He further submitted that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and the investigation is pending. Hence, he opposed to grant bail.

¶29

5.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and that the date of occurrence is 10.07.2025, by this time most of the investigation might have been completed and also considering the fact that the petitioner/Accused is in judicial custody from 17.07.2025, taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶30

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

CRL OP(MD).No.13664 of 2025

¶34

bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai and on further conditions that :-

¶35

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶36

[b] The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and contact number to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai. If the petitioner changes his residential address, he shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai;

¶37

[c] the petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police daily i.e., 10.00 a.m., until further orders.

¶38

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶39

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶40

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the

¶41

learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 4/5

¶42

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

¶43

CRL OP(MD).No.13664 of 2025

¶44

in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶45

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

¶46

/ TRUE COPY /