V.Stephenraj @ Sriban v. The State Rep.By Its, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.251 of 2026 1.V.Stephenraj @ Sriban 2.Rajasridhar @ Sridhar .. Petitioners

Versus

The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Roshanai, Villupuram District.

(Crime No.351 of 2025) .. Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.351 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners :

Mr.Tamil Selvan For Respondent :

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(1), 191(3), 296(b), 118(1), 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.351 of 2025 seek anticipatory bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioners is that, due to previous enmity between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, on the date of the 1/5

alleged occurrence, the petitioners abused and assaulted the defacto complainant with iron rod and wooden log and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the injured was discharged from the hospital and that the petitioners have no previous case against them. Hence, he opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the fact that the injured was discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case pending against them, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order 2/5

before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Tindivanam, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only), each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (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]; and;

3/5

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

08.01.2026 jai To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Tindivanam

2. The Inspector of Police, Roshanai, Villupuram District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4/5

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

jai CRL.O.P.No.251 of 2026 08.01.2026 5/5