Rajendran J v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Rajendran J ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Reddichavadi Police station, Tamilnadu-607403. Cuddalore District.
(Crime No. 18 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to release the Petitioner on Bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the Crime No. 18 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.V.Sudan For Respondent(s):
Ms.J.R.Achana, GA (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(B), 115(2), 131, 76, 324(4), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in connection with the Cr.No.18 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner and the de facto complainant are neighbors. On account of a dispute over a boundary wall, the petitioner, along with other accused, engaged in an altercation with the de facto complainant and her family members. Further they abused the de facto complainant in filthy language and assaulted her and her daughter, resulting in injuries. Consequently, the respondent police registered the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case by the respondent police. He further submitted that a complaint was registered against the defacto complainant before the respondent police in Crime No.19 of 2026 and the petitioner also undertakes to cooperate with the investigation, hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and, on instructions, submitted that it is a case and case in counter, there was no property damage reported during the alleged incident, the investigation is still in its initial stages. She further submitted that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner; however, in view of the nature of the allegations involving physical assault, she opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the nature of the allegations and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, and taking note of the fact that the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant are simple in nature, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. Accordingly, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
7. 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 made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Cuddalore on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am., for a period two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [d] 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].
[e] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.
09-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order JAI To
1. The Inspector of Police Reddichavadi Police station, Tamilnadu-607403.
2. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Cuddalore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
JAI 09-02-2026