Karunagaran v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Karunagaran ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No. 17 of 2026) ... Respondent 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 in Crime No.17 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Thirumalaivasan Pachiyappan For Respondent : Mr. P. Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(B), 115(2), 109 of BNS, in Crime No.17 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to money dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant, on the date of occurrence, there was a wordy quarrel during which the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with knife causing injuries on his ribs. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that due to money dispute, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant and that the injury caused is a stab injury. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that this is a case where stab injuries were caused to the defacto complainant using knife. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) further submitted that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it may have an impact on the investigation as the witnesses may be tampered with. 2/4

Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.03.2026 DRL To 1.The Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN.J.

DRL Crl.OP.No.5930 of 2026 09.03.2026 4/4