Janakiraman v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Janakiraman ... Petitioner Vs.

State by: The Inspector of Police, J-4 Kotturpuram Police Station, Chennai City.

... Respondent (Crime No.21 of 2026) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.21 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.Pugalenthi Pandiyan For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 49, 296(b), 126(2), 115(2), 309(4) and 351(3) of BNSS in Crime No.21 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is due to parking dispute there was quarrel arose between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. Due to which, the petitioner waylaid the defacto complainant and abused him with 1/4

filthy language and also assaulted him by using hands and legs and thereby caused simple injuries and thereafter, taken away a sum of Rs.1,700/- from him. Hence, a case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to parking dipute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner has taken away a sum of Rs.1,500/- from the defacto complainant in which, they recovered only Rs.450/- from the petitioner; and that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that no previous bad antecedents have been registered against the petitioner. However, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the nature of 2/4

allegations levelled against the petitioner, no previous bad antecedents have been registered against him; and also the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned 9th Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai-15, on condition that the petitioner 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 conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) 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 K.RAJASEKAR, J.

ssi of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent 3/4

Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

03.02.2026 ssi To 1.The 9th Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai-15.

2. The Inspector of Police, J-4 Kotturpuram Police Station, Chennai City. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 4/4