Vikram v. State By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP No.1291 of 2026 1.Vikram 2.Kumar 3.Govindaraj ... Petitioners Vs The State by The Inspector of Police, Maharajakadai Police Station, Krishnagiri District (Crime No.12 of 2026 ) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in Crime No.12 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. P.M. Jayachandran For Respondent(s) :

Mr. A. Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.01.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(2) of BNS Act, Section 4 of TNPHW Act and under Section 3(1) of TNPPD Act in Crime No.12 of 2026, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail. 1/5

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to the property dispute pending between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant, the petitioners entered into the house of the defacto complainant and thereby caused damages to the property worth about Rs.3,00,000/- Hence this case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner is having title over the property and there was some waste materials and when the first petitioner tried to clean the same, it was objected by the defacto complainant, due to which a quarrel arose between them. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 08.01.2026,and he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and sought for bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that it is a case of demolition of a residential building. He further submitted that when the defacto complainant prevented the petitioner from demolishing the subject property, the petitioner attempted to assault and attack the defacto complainant. Hence, a case was registered.

2/5

5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted the first petitioner and the defacto complainant are residing in the same building for the past 40 years and due to property dispute the petitioners caused damages to the defacto complainant's property worth about Rs.3,00,000/-. Hence opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

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

7. Considering the submissions made by both sides and also taking note of the fact that there was a civil dispute pending between the parties and the petitioners caused damaged to the defacto complainant's property worth about Rs.3,00,000/-, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 27.01.2026 smn 3/5

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Maharajakadai Police Station, Krishnagiri District

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras 4/5

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

smn Crl.O.P. No.1291 of 2026 27.01.2026 5/5