Selva @ Selvakumar v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 329(4), 324(2), 351(2) and 303(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.172 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. Page2 of 6

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with ther accused persons, had quarrelled with the defacto complainant, damaged the EB Box, and stolen certain iron materials. Based upon such allegations, the present case has been registered.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had already been enlarged on anticipatory bail on 23.10.2025. However, due to his inability to arrange and furnish the sureties, the benefit of bail could not be availed by him and the earlier bail order had lapsed. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed and the petitioner is not required for any further custodial interrogation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the petitioner was already granted bail on an earlier occasion; however, he failed to comply with the conditions imposed by this Court, resulting in cancellation of the bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner is having five previous criminal cases. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. Page3 of 6

¶5Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), it is seen that the petitioner was already granted anticipatory bail on 23.10.2025, but the same could not be availed by him due to non-furnishing of sureties. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the charge sheet has already been filed and the said fact has not been seriously disputed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side). Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and taking note of the fact that the earlier order granting anticipatory bail could not be acted upon only due to the inability of the petitioner to furnish sureties, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Tindivanam, Villupuram district, 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 learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb Page4 of 6 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner is directed to make a non-refundable deposit of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand Only] directly to the credit of "Tamilnadu Advocate Clerks Association, High Court Campus, Chennai", without prejudice to the right of the defence before the Trial Court and the receipt shall be produced at the time of executing the bond;

(d) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am and 5.30 pm for a period of two months; thereafter as and when required;

(e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(f) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 08-07-2026 JRS Page5 of 6 To

1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Tindivanam, Villupuram District.

2.The Inspector of Police Tindivanam Police Station, Villupuram. Crime No.172 of 2025

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o17576oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. JRS CRLoOPoNo.o17576oofo2026 08-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Selva @ Selvakumar S/o Arumugam, Residing at, No.61, Mariyamman Koil Street, Tindivanam, Villupuram. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police No 61 Mariyamman Koil Street TindivanamTindivanam Police Station, Villupuram. Crime No.172 of 2025 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest pending trail in Crime No.172 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Tindivanam Police Station, Villupuram. For Petitioner(s): Mr. N.Sivaraman For Respondent(s): MS.R.S.INDIRA, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)