Muniraj v. State Rep.By Its, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO. 369 of 2026 1.Muniraj 2.Srinath

...Petitioners/A2 and A3

Vs The State rep. by The Inspector of Police Royakottai Police Station Krishnagiri District Crime No. 295 of 2025.

Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No.295 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.P.M.Jayachandran For Respondent : Ms.J.R. Archana Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ----

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 295 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2.The allegation against the petitioners is that there was some land dispute between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant. On 23.12.2025 at about 11.00 am, A1 was harvesting from coconut farm belonging to the de-facto complainant and when the same was questioned by the de-facto complainant, there was wordy quarrel between them, A1 along with other co-accused assaulted him with hands and woodenlog using abused filthy language, resulting in, the de-facto complainant severely injured and he admitted to a Government Hospital. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there was some property dispute between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant. He further submits that this case is a case-in-counter in Crime No. 296 of 2025 filed by the petitioners herein against the de-facto complainant. He also submits that the injured discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case. He further submits that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to furnish sufficient solvent sureties for their release. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submits that the injured is discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case. He further submits that this case is case-in-counter in Crime No. 296 of 2025 which was filed by the petitioners against the de-facto complainant. He opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the injured is discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case; that this case is a case-in-counter; this Court is 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 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Denkanikottai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: 3/6

(a) If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[b] 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;

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[d] 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];

4/6

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 09.01.2026 MSM To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Denkanikottai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

MSM Crl.O.P.No. 369 of 2026 09.01.2026 6/6