Allowed¶54

Premnath v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC24 Feb 2025CRL OP(MD)/2829/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; pre-arrest bail; Section 482 BNSS 2023; Sections 296(b), 126(2), 132, 351(3) BNS 2023; illegal transport of gravel sand; seizure of lorry TN 30 Y 5266; threat to revenue officials; Chinthamanipatti Police Station; Karur District; Crime No.37/2025; Judicial Magistrate No.I Kulithalai; daily reporting condition; bond Rs.25,000 with two sureties; P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala (2005) 13 SCC 283; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; R. Sakthivel J.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory (pre-arrest) bail granted in Crime No.37 of 2025 subject to nine conditions, including release on arrest or surrender before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, Karur District within 15 days on a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like sum, and daily reporting before that Magistrate at 10.00 am until further orders. ¶54

Premnath Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶54

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner/Accused No.1, who apprehends arrest in Crime No.37 of 2025 for offences under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 132 and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023, should be granted anticipatory (pre-arrest) bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023.

¶24

Court's answer

The Court held that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary in this case; the petitioner has permanent residence and deep roots in society with less possibility of absconding, the excavation licence is still in force, and, to give him an opportunity to reform himself, the Court was inclined to grant pre-arrest bail.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

Pre-arrest bail was granted: the petitioner is to be released on arrest or on surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, Karur District within 15 days of the order copy being ready, on executing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties each for a like sum, and is bound by conditions including daily reporting before that Magistrate at 10.00 am until further orders, availability for interrogation as and when required, no inducement/threat/promise or tampering with evidence, no leaving India without prior permission, and furnishing residential address and mobile number to the concerned Magistrate.

¶41

Key takeaways

On breach of any of the bail conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions were imposed by it, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala, (2005) 13 SCC 283.ratio¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted. The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (R. Sakthivel J.) allowed a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 filed by Premnath (A1) seeking pre-arrest bail in Crime No.37 of 2025 of Chinthamanipatti Police Station, Karur District, registered for offences under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 132 and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023. The prosecution alleged that on 07.02.2025, after revenue officials seized a lorry (TN 30 Y 5266) found illegally transporting gravel sand, A1 and his friends restrained the officials and threatened them with dire consequences to secure release of the vehicle. Holding that custodial interrogation was not necessary, and noting the petitioner's permanent residence, deep roots in society and the subsistence of his excavation licence, the Court granted pre-arrest bail on a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like sum, subject to conditions including daily reporting before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai at 10.00 am until further orders; on breach, action follows as laid down in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala, (2005) 13 SCC 283.

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.2829 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 24/02/2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVEL

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.2829 of 2025

Premnath

... Petitioner/A1

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Chinthamanipatti Police Station, Karur District. Crime No. 37/2025.

¶12

... Respondent/Complainant

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Suruliraja, Advocate

¶14

for Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, Advocate

¶15

For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj

¶16

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶17

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS

¶18

PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.37 of 2025 on the file of the respondentPolice.

¶19

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶20

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 12.02.2025

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to

¶22

1/6

¶23

CRL OP(MD). No.2829 of 2025

¶24

grant an order of pre-arrest bail.

¶25

The petitioner / Accused No.1 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 132 and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, in Crime No.37 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.

¶26

The case of the prosecution is that on 07.02.2025, the defacto complainant along with revenue officials, while conducting vehicle check up, intercepted a Lorry bearing Regn.No. TN 30 Y 5266, driven by one Selvaraj and found that Gravel Sand was illegally transported. Hence, the defacto complainant and other officials seized the Lorry and secured the driver. Subsequently, on the same day, at about 9.00 am, A1, along with his friends, restrained the defacto complainant and other officials and threatened them with dire consequences to release the vehicle. Hence, the case.

¶27

Mr.P. Suruliraja, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that though the petitioner has obtained licence to excavate the Minerals and Minerals in Patta No.248/2 to an extent of 1.63.5 Hectares for the period of five years, he excavated beyond the permitted extent. He however submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. He therefore prays for

¶28

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

¶29

2/6

¶30

CRL OP(MD). No.2829 of 2025

¶31

grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

¶32

Per contra, Mr.S.S. Manoj, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶33

appearing for the respondent-police, submits that the investigation of the case is still pending. He further submits that at this stage of investigation, if the pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner, he may cause threat to the defacto complainant and other officials again and also the witnesses and tamper with the evidence. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.

¶34

Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.

¶35

In view of the offence alleged against the petitioner, this Court is of the view

¶36

that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary in this case. The petitioner has permanent residence and deep roots in the society and therefore, there is less possibility for absconding. Considering the same and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the licence is still in force and with a view to give an opportunity to reform himself, this Court is inclined to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

¶37

(i) The petitioner shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest or in the event of his surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai,

¶38

Karur District, within a period of 15 days from date on which the order copy is made https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

3/6

¶40

CRL OP(MD). No.2829 of 2025

¶41

ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate.

¶42

(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity.

¶43

(iii) The petitioner shall report before the learend Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, Karur District daily at 10.00 am until further orders.

¶44

(iv) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶45

(v) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶46

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶47

(vii) The petitioner shall not directly or in directly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and the other officials and tamper with the evidence.

¶48

(viii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

4/6

¶50

CRL OP(MD). No.2829 of 2025

¶51

the concerned Magistrate.

¶52

(ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Judicial

¶53

Magistrate or Trial Court, as the case may be, is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].

¶54