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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Mr.Anees S/o Afzal ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by its The Inspector of Police, G1 Vepery Police station, Germiah Road, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS To enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the investigation in Crime No.540 of 2025 for the alleged offence under Section 296(b), 74 of BNS on the file of the respondent, The Inspector of Police, G1 Vepery Police station, Vepery Chennai and pass orders For Petitioner :Mr. G. Swathy For Intervenor ; Mr.J. Srinivasan

For Respondent(s):

Ms. J.R. Archana, Govt Advocate ( Crl side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 74 of BNSS in Crime No.540 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that this petitioner is the brother-in-law of the defacto complainant and there was a wordy quarrel between them. Due to which this petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with water bottle and caused injuries to him. It is alleged that this petitioner has also video graphed the occurrence. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it is a case of sudden quarrel and he has not caused any injuries to the defacto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation and ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with wooden logs and caused injuries to him. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has attacked the defacto complainant and caused simple injuries to him. He further submitted that the victim was treated as out patient and there is no previous cases pending against the petitioner. However, she opposed for grant of anticipatory bail;.

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

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel; nature of offence; injured was treated as out patient and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is 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, before the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore 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 learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned 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 of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent 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 accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

18-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order smn To.

1. The learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmor

2. The Inspector of Police, G1 Vepery Police station, Germiah Road, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras Chennai 600 104.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

smn 18-02-2026