Vasanthi v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vasanthi W/o.Subramani, 352, Kalarpatti, Kattuvalvu, Muthunaickenpatti, Salem-636 304.

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

Cr.No.75 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, in Cr.No.75 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Omalur Police Station, Salem district. For Petitioner(s):

Vasudevan Bramalingam For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.75 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to a property dispute, the petitioner picked a quarrel with the defacto complainant, assaulted him with stones, and threatened him with dire consequences, thereby causing injuries. Hence, the complaint.

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 petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that the injured sustained grievous injuries and was constrained to remain in the hospital for nearly thirty days. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

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

6. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the injuries sustained by

the defacto complainant, this Court is of the firm view that if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail in such offences, it may embolden the petitioner to commit similar offences in future and show scant regard for the law. Hence, this Court is of the view that the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. 27-03-2026 MPA To

1. The Inspector of Police Omalur Police Station, Salem District.

Cr.No.75 of 2026.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MPA 27-03-2026