Rajesh v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Rajesh

2. Jai @ Jayaseelan

3. Kamaraj @ Thirukmaraj

4. Prasanth

5. Karthi @ Karthik

6. Jegan

7. Shanmugam Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Tindivanam Police Station, Villupuram District. (FIR No.432/2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in connection with the crime no.432 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.K.Muruganandham For Respondent(s):

Ms.J.R.Archana, GA (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNSS 2023 , in connection with the Cr.No.432 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegations against the petitioners is that on 03.12.2025, while the defacto complainant standing near AHA Tea Shop, Tindivanam Taluk Officer, the petitioners questioned regarding facebook posts, abused in filthy language, assaulted him with hands and pushed down, causing simple injuries. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons, and they have been falsely implicated in this case by the respondent police and ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. He further submit that since petitioners also suffered injuries, a counter case has been registered in Crime No. 433 of 2025 before the same police station, and prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution's case and on instructions,

submitted that the injured was discharged from hospital, the first petitioner is having 17 previous case pending against him and the other petitioners has no previous case pending against them and that the investigation in this case is still pending and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, the injured has been discharged from hospital, though the first petitioner has 17 previous case pending against him, on a perusal of the FIR, it reveals that it is case and case in counter before the same police station and the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not necessary, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tindivanam on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at

10.30 am., for a period two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[b] the petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

08-01-2026 Jai

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Tindivanam Police Station, Villupuram District.

2. THE Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tindivanam.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

jai 08-01-2026