Lakshmanan v. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Lakshmanan S/o.Manormani, Nayakanur Village and Post, Vaniyambadi Taluk, Tirupattur District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep by Inspector Of Police, Kavalur Police Station, Tirupattur District.

Crime No.01 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of the arrest by the respondent police for offence under sections offence under Section 296(b), 1 18(1) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita(BNS), 2023 Crime No.01/2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Gopinath For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

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

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that due to previous enmity with regard to land dispute, a wordy quarrel ensued between the parties on the date of the occurrence. During the course of said quarrel, the petitioner is alleged to have abused and assaulted the defacto complainant by throwing stones, thereby causing injuries to him. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are blood brothers and that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. 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 the petitioner and the defacto complainant are blood brothers. He further submitted that the alleged occurrence took place on 12.03.2026 and

the FIR was registered on 13.03.2026 and that the defacto complainant sustained only simple injuries and was discharged from the hospital. 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 counsel on either side, it is seen that the alleged occurrence took place on 12.03.2026 and the FIR was registered on 13.032026. It is also evident that the defacto complainant sustained only simple injuries and was discharged from the hospital on the same day. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary at this length of time. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail with 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, Vaniyambadi, 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 daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks; (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.

30-03-2026 DRL To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi.

2. The Inspector Of Police, Kavalur Police Station, Tirupattur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 30-03-2026