Dhatchanamoorthy v. The State Represented By, 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. 410 of 2026 1.Dhatchanamoorthy 2.Ragulraj 3.Saravanan Petitioners Vs The State rep. by The Inspector of Police Naduveerapattu Police Station Cuddalore District In Crime No. 316 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 their arrest pending investigation in Cr.No. 316 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.Ragul Kousik 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. 316 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that there was a wordy quarrel between the first petitioner and the de-facto complainant, and subsequently, the petitioners assaulted the de-facto complainant with iron pipe, resulting in, the de-facto complainant severely injured on his leg. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated and the injured is discharged from the hospital. He also submitted that the petitioners are not having any previous case. Hence, he prayed to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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 are not having any previous case. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

2/6

6. Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that the petitioners are not having any previous case; that the injured is discharged from the hospital, 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 No.I, Cuddalore, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (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;

3/6

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 am 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];

[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.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/6

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

MSM CRL OP NO. 410 of 2026 09.01.2026 5/6