Vimal @ Vimalkumar v. The State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vimal @ Vimalkumar ..Petitioner Vs The State rep.by, Inspector of Police, Srimushnam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.10 of 2025.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in connection with Crime No.10 of 2025 pending investigation on file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.M.Elumalai For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner/A4 apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1), 351(3) and 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhit, 2023 in Crime No.10 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to a civil dispute between Accused 1 to 3 and the de facto complainant, Accused 1 to 3 assaulted the de facto complainant and the de facto complainant sustained injuries. Hence, an FIR was registered. Later, the petitioner/A4's name was also included in the FIR.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case without any basis. It is further submitted that there is no serious overt act attributed against the petitioner and even according to the prosecution, he has helped the other accused. It is also submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that Accused 1 to 3 has already been enlarged on bail in Crl.O.P.No.5354 of 2025 dated 27.02.2025. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioners.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for both sides, it is seen that there is no serious overt act attributed to the petitioner. Taking into account the nature of the allegations, the date of occurrence and the fact that other co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required at this length of time. Hence, 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Virudhachalam, 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, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

24-03-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Srimushnam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate No. II, Virudhachalam.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 24-03-2026