Mugunthan v. State Represented 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. Mugunthan S/o. Madhavan 21286, Om Sakthi Koil Street, Ulundhai, Thiruvallur-602105

2. Prakash 2/68, Shasthiri StreetUlundai,Tiruvallur-602105 Ulundai, Tiruvallur-602105,

3. Shankar @ Manikandan S/o. Munusamy 2/143, Shasthiri Street Ulundai Tiruvallur-602105

4. Lingeshwaran S/o. Shanmuga Sundaram, 2/125, Sai Baba Street Ulundai, Tiruvallur-602105 ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Represented by The Inspector of Police Mappedu police Station, Tiruvallur District.

(Cr. No.73 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the Respondent Police in Cr. No. 73 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. D.Bennington 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.73 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are drivers and in connection with the delivery of goods, there was some contestation between the petitioners and the defacto complainant. In furtherance of this, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant, thereby causing injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case and that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 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 five accused in this case and the petitioners are ranked as A1, A3, A4 and A5. He further submitted that the second petitioner has already been remanded to judicial custody and is still in prison. He further submitted that the injured has been 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 submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that the second petitioner is already in judicial custody and the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is of the view that at this length of time, no 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 No.II, Tiruvallur, 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 stay at Coimbatore and report before the Peelamedu Police Station, 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 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 No.II, Tiruvallur.

2.The Inspector of Police Mappedu police Station, Tiruvallur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 21-04-2026