Deel Imthiyas @ Imthiyaz vs State

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.09.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 333, 296(b), 351(3), 109 BNS r/w 4 of TNPHW Act and under Section 3 of TN Public Property (Prevention of Damage & Loss) Act, in Crime No.254 of 2025, seeks bail.

The allegation against the petitioner is that, due to previous enmity, he entered into the house of the defacto complainant, threatened her with dire consequences, and also attempted to stab her. Hence, the complaint.

Earlier, this Court dismissed the bail petition in Crl.OP.No.27226 of 2025 dated 08.10.2025 on the ground that the investigation had not yet been completed.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted the petitioner was detained under Act 14 of 1982 and that the said detention was subsequently revoked on the recommendation of the Advisory Board dated 18.11.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 08.09.2025 and that he is ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has 13 previous cases pending against him and that, in this case no one was injured. He further submitted that the property was damaged to the extent of Rs.2,000/-. Hence, he opposed for the grant of bail to the petitioner.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.

On perusal of the FIR, it is seen that no one was sustained injury and that the threat was made to the defacto complainant.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 08.09.2025, and that the earlier detention order was quashed and subsequently revoked, and though the petitioner has previous cases against him, in the present case no one was injured, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Vaniyambadi, and on further conditions that:-

[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;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the concerned Court daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] 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 learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.