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) 74678

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



##PAGE1##

CRL OP No.35487 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

CRL OP No. 35487 of 2025

Vijaya

W/o.Sundaram,

No.1, Pillaiyar Kovil Street, Rangapuram,

Sathuvachari, Vellore District.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

State represented by,

The Inspector of Police,

Rathnagiri Police Station, Ranipet District.

Crime No.205 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.205 of

2025 pending on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Balamanikandan

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.35487 of 2025

ORDER

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

respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of B.N.S.

in connection with the Crime No.205 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the owner of the

Ashok Leyland Tipper Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-23-AK-7898 and it is

alleged that the driver of the vehicle, on inspection, was found in possession of

6 units of mixer jelly and M-sand in the aforesaid vehicle. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted 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 she 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 is no previous case pending against the petitioner,

however, 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.35487 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 and no previous case is pending

against the petitioner, 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/her

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

copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate, Arcot, 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 every

Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and

3 / 6

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

##PAGE4##

CRL OP No.35487 of 2025

when required for interrogation;

[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 t

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