Raja v. State Rep.By The Station House Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Raja ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Represented by, The Station House Officer, Vadalur Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No.51 of 2026).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.51 of 2026 on the file of respondent Police.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Deepak for Mr.A.Gowtham For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 331(2), 308(2), 132 1/4

and 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.51 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.02.2026, there was a quarrel between the parties with regard to the cost of bottles at TASMAC. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it was only a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the de facto complainant and that no injury was sustained by the de facto complainant. Even according to the prosecution, the allegation is only that the petitioner abused and threatened the de facto complainant. Hence, he sought anticipatory bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police would strongly opposed the anticipatory bail on the ground that when the petitioner attempted to take away four beer bottles without making payment, the occurrence took place.

5. Considering the date of occurrence, namely 22.02.2026, and at the lapse of time, this Court is of the view that no custodial interrogation of the 2/4

petitioner is required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi, 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 of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police twice a day at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30 p.m., for a period of 45 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

(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.

17.03.2026 cda To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi. 2.The Station House Officer, Vadalur Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/4