Sakthivel v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Sakthivel S/o.Murugesan, No.16/A, Veeraragavalu Nagar, Vinayagapuram, Kolathur, Ambattur, Chennai-99

2. Balasubramani No.16/A, Veeraragavalu Nagar, Vinayagapuram, Kolathur, Ambattur, Chennai-99

3. Revathi D/o.Gubendran, No.8/2, Mallipu Nagar, Perambur, Chennai-11 ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police M-3, Puzhal Police Station, Chennai.

Cr.No. 53/2026.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of the arrest in Crime No. 53 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr. M.Abi For Respondent(s):

MR.P.DHILEEPAN, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL SIDE)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2) of BNS, Act in Crime No.53 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that due to pathway dispute, a wordy quarrel arose, during which the petitioners allegedly attacked the defacto complainant and his family members with a wooden log, thereby causing injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that it is a case and case in counter. He further submitted that the FIR against the petitioners was came to be registered on 13.01.2026. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that there are totally four accused in this case and the petitioners are arrayed as A1 to A3. He further submitted that due to pathway dispute, a wordy quarrel arose in which the defacto complainant sustained simple injuries and

was discharged from the hospital. 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.

6. Considering the totality of the circumstances of the case and the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and that the FIR was came to be registered on 13.01.2026, at this length of time, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 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 am for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (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.

21-04-2026 DRL

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram.

2.The Inspector of Police M-3 Puzhal Police Station, Chennai.

Cr.No. 53/2026.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 21-04-2026