M.Viswanathan v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Viswanathan S/o. Muthaan 155, Pudhu Kalani Semur, Poondurai Semur, Erode - 638 115.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police Arachalur Police Station, Erode District.

(Crime No.24 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No.24 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render Justice.

For Petitioner(s):

C.S.Saravanan For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 329(4), 296(b), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS 2023, in Crime No.24 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in a relationship and, due to some misunderstanding on

12.02.2026, a wordy quarrel arose between them, during which the petitioner caused certain injuries to the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the injured sustained only simple injuries and was discharged from the hospital on 15.02.2026.The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), by relying upon the Accident Register issued by Sutha Hospital, would contend that the defacto complainant was admitted as an inpatient from 12.02.2026 to 15.02.2026 and that she had sustained two grievous injuries. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the injuries, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would cause great fear and mental trauma to the defacto complainant. Hence, opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available.

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the defacto complainant was admitted to the hospital for a period of three days and had sustained grievous injuries. In such view of the position, this Court is of the view that in these type of cases, if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, it may embolden him to indulge in similar acts. Hence, this Court is of the view that the petitioner does not deserve the grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. 13-03-2026 MPA To 1.The Inspector of Police Arachalur Police Station, Erode District.

(Crime No.24 of 2026) 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MPA 13-03-2026