SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 74675

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice P. DHANABAL
MUNUSAMY – Appellant
Versus
State by Inspector of Police – Respondent



##PAGE1##

CRL OP No.35403 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

CRL OP No. 35403 of 2025

Munusamy

S/o.Viswanatha Reddy,

Periavattu, Ramapuram, Tada mandal,

Nellore, Andra Pradesh.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

State by,

The Inspector of Police,

C5-Vengal Police station,

Thiruvallur District.

Cr.No.264 of 2025.

Respondent(s)

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No.264 of

2025 pending on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Sasikumar

For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Udaya Kumar

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

1 / 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 04:13:44 pm )

##PAGE2##

CRL OP No.35403 of 2025

ORDER

The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the

respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 326(a)

of B.N.S. in connection with the Crime No.264 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other

accused were found in possession of 8 units of river sand in a lorry bearing

registration No.AP 39 TZ 7071. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a false case

has been foisted against the petitioner and that since the material objects have

been seized, custodial interrogation is not required in this case. He further

submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is

innocent of the offences as alleged. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the

respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and submitted that the

sand along with the vehicle has been seized by the respondent police. He would

further submit that there are two previous cases pending against the petitioner

and hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2 / 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 04:13:44 pm )

##PAGE3##

CRL OP No.35403 of 2025

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and nature of

offences and also considering the fact that the material objects were seized by

the respondent police and since the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is

not required for the purpose of investigation, I am inclined to grant anticipatory

bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his

appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order

copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thiruvallur, 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 condition that:

[a] the petitioner and 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 respondent police everyday

at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required

for interrogation;

3 / 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 04:13:44 pm )

##PAGE4##

CRL OP No.35403 of 2025

[c] 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

[d] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of

the Court;

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

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned

Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top