M.Muruganantham v. State Represented By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. M.Muruganantham, S/o.Mohan

2. D.Gunasekaran, S/o.Devendran ... Petitioners Vs.

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station, Perumbakkam.

(Crime No.60 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners/accused on bail in the event of arrest in connection with the F.I.R. in crime No.60 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Dhayalan For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 351(3) of BNS read with Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.60 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant was attacked by few named accused persons and other unnamed persons (including the petitioner herein) out of dispute among the neighbourhood resulting the defacto complainant was hospitalized. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation and abide by any other stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and strongly opposed this application on the ground that there is no change in circumstances from the dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail application in Crl.O.P.No.5872 of 2026 dated 12.03.2026. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

2/4

6. Upon perusing the factual position, it is observed that the injured defacto complainant was admitted to the hospital on 28.02.2026 and was discharged only on 04.03.2026. Considering the serious injuries sustained by the de-facto complainant, this Court is of the view that enlarging the petitioner on bail would affect the moral fabric of society. Hence, this Court finds it undesirable to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 10.04.2026 mp To

1. The Inspector of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station, Perumbakkam. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

mp Crl.OP.No.9070 of 2026 10.04.2026 4/4