Kuppayee v. The State Rep.By Its, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Kuppayee W/o. Srinivashan, Nachanoor Kaattuvalavu, Koranampatti, Konganapuram.

Idappadi Taluk, Salem District

2. Selvakumar S/o. Chithuraj, No.3/332, Sanjeeviyur, Surappalli, Jalakantapuram, Salem 636501 ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.by its, The Inspector of Police, Idappadi Police Station, (Crime No. 70 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to grant an Anticipatory Bail to this Petitioners in the event of their arrest or on their appearance pending before any court in connection with the case in Crime No.70 of 2026 investigation on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.A Arun For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.70 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the due to a long-standing land dispute with the petitioner's family and the defacto complainant's family, on 13.03.2026, a quarrel occurred between them, in which Mani sustained injuries and was admitted to the Government Hospital. While so, on 14.03.2026, the petitioners along with others, entered the hospital, assaulted the defacto complainant with iron stand, thereby causing internal injuries to his forehead and shoulder. It is further alleged that the petitioners took his mobile phone and motorcycle keys and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had given a counter case against the defacto complainant and, in furtherance thereof, a case has been registered against him as if the petitioners had assaulted the defacto complainant. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would

strongly oppose the bail application on the ground that there is a case and case in counter in Crime Nos.64 & 65 of 2026. However, the present case arises subsequent to the earlier occurrence, wherein the petitioners went to the hospital where the defacto complainant was admitted and assaulted him using hospital equipment, thereby causing injuries, which compelled the defacto complainant to undergo treatment for four days. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the first petitioner is a woman and that there is a case and case in counter relating to the occurrence dated 14.03.2026, and the defacto complainant was hospitalized for a period of four days. In such circumstances, if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, there is a possibility of law and order issues in the locality where the petitioners are residing. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 30-03-2026 DRL

To

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

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 30-03-2026