Aravindhan vs State

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.09.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 296(b), 109(1) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.309 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he is the relative of the defacto complainant and due to quarrel between the family members, this petitioner who was in the driving seat, driven the car intentionally, inside the lake and after that he jumped out of the car and left four persons including the defacto complainant, inside the vehicle. Despite their requests for help, he did not take any steps to save them. Fortunately the persons who are crossing the roads have rescued the defacto complainant’s family members. Hence, a complaint was lodged and the petitioner was arrested for the said offences.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that due to family dispute the occurrence had taken place and this false complaint has been lodged. It is only accident and that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 28.09.2025. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has attempted to murder not only the defacto complainant but also children who have travelled in the car, thereby caused trauma in the minds of the young children, however they were safely rescued by the persons who were crossing the road. He further submitted that now the investigation has been completed and he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

This is the successive bail petition. Considering the fact that the petitioner is not having any previous case, though this Court dismissed the earlier bail applications on the ground that the investigation is pending, the investigation has now been completed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her 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 No.I, Thirupathur, 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 four 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.