Rajadurai And Others vs State

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.09.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 329(3), 296(b), 351(3), 303(2) of BNS & under Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, 1992, in Crime No.287 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

The allegation against the petitioner is that, due to property dispute, petitioner joining hands with other accused entered into the defacto complainant's property and damaged the properties worth about Rs.1.25 lakhs. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that the petitioners are ready to deposit any reasonable amount to the credit of the crime number. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioners.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners and further submitted that the petitioners have no previous cases.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioners and taking into account the period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the credit of Crime No. 287 of 2025 before the trial Court, on such deposit the petitioners are 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, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily 10.00 a.m. for a period of two weeks, and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

[d] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;

[e] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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)13 SCC 283];

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