Allowed

Sudarsan v. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Madras HC15 Oct 2025CRL OP(MD)/17810/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail petition by an accused added as Accused No.10 in a protest-related case arising from a custodial death protest. The court granted anticipatory bail on conditions including a bond with sureties, daily police reporting for one week, and non-tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to reporting and conduct conditions.

Sudarsan Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector… — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 15/10/2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶8

Sudarsan ... Petitioner/Accused

¶9

¶10

The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.By, the Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai City. (Crime No.670 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶12

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS

¶13

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.670 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶17

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶18

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 324(4), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act, 1984 in Crime No.670 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶19

The case of the prosecution is that one Dineshkumar was picked up by the police officials and was later found dead in a canal, which led to a protest by the local residents demanding registration of an FIR against the police officials. It is alleged that the petitioner, who also belongs to the same area, participated in the protest and caused damage to articles in the nearby shops.. Hence, the complaint.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶21

2/6

¶22

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

¶23

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶24

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing

¶25

for the respondent-Police submitted that after investigation, the petitioner has been added as Accused No.10 in this case. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶26

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

¶27

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.VI, Madurai, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on further conditions that:

¶28

[a]the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their

¶29

3/6

¶30

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

¶31

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶32

photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar

¶33

card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

¶34

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent

¶35

police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

¶36

[c]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence

¶37

or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶38

[d]the petitioner shall not abscond either during

¶39

investigation or trial.

¶40

[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the

¶41

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 is released on bail by the learned

¶42

4/6

¶43

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

¶44

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶45

Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala

¶46

[(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶47

[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR

¶48

can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

(S S Y J) 15.10.2025

KSA

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.VI, Madurai.

¶53

2.The Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai District.

¶54

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

¶55

S.SRIMATHY,J

¶56

5/6

¶57

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

¶58

CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶59

ORDER

¶60

KSA

¶61

IN CRL OP(MD). No.17810 of 2025

¶62

15.10.2025

¶63

6/6

¶64

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

Sudarsan v. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudarsan v. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by

Muthumari @ Muthumariappan Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Through, The Inspector of Police

Gopalakrishnan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Vijay Vengadesh @ Viji Venkatesh Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.by

Alagarsamy Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

D. Sendukodi Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by