Farookhan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.08.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Corresponding Section 294(b), 323, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860) and 3 of PPDL Act , in Crime No.318 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that, on 20.08.2026, at about 02.30p.m., the petitioner/A3, along with A1 and A2, allegedly intercepted the de-facto complainant near Aboorva South Cafe, picked up a quarrel, abused and assaulted him, and threatened him. It is further alleged that A1 damaged the de-facto complainant’s two-wheeler. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He also further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are four previous cases are pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); and considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner since 22.08.2026, this Court is of the firm view that further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court-IV, Vellore, 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[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 aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

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