Renu v. The State

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.04.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL.OP No.8529 of 2026 1.Renu 2.Mannu

...Petitioners

Vs.

The State, The Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.21 of 2026)

...Respondent

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District, pending investigation.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Viswanathan SB For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 324(4) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.21 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to property dispute between the accused and the defacto complainant, the petitioners/accused assaulted the defacto complainant with iron rod and verbally abused the defacto complainant. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the occurrence took place on 13.02.2026 and petitioners and the defacto complainant are relatives and the entire occurrence took place in furtherance of the land dispute and the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would invite the attention of this Court that the earlier anticipatory bail application was dismissed as it was premature and would affect the prosecution case. However, he would fairly submit that the investigation is now completed. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Taking into consideration the factual position and the further fact that the injured has already been discharged and for these type of offences no custodial interrogation is required, this Court is inclined to enlarge them on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions;

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate's Court-II, Thiruvannamalai District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioners 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

06.04.2026 dna

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate's Court-II, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3.The Inspector of Police, Mangalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.21 of 2026)

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

dna 06.04.2026