Balasubramaniam v. The State Rep. By The Sub-Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.Balasubramaniam 2.Rangan 3.Manjula ... Petitioners Vs.

The State represented by its The Sub-Inspector of Police, Alangiyam Police station, Tirupur District.

(Crime No.62 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.62 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.K.V.Muthuvisakan For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 133 of BNS, 2023, and Section 4 of the 1/6

Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women (Amendment) Act, 2002, in Crime No.62 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to a dispute arising out of a lease of land for running a petrol bunk between the petitioners and the son-inlaw of the de facto complainant, a quarrel ensued on 07.04.2026 when the petitioners were present in their agricultural field. It is further alleged that when the petitioners were setting fire to trash, the de facto complainant questioned the same after taking a video, which led to a wordy quarrel, and in furtherance thereof, the petitioners assaulted the de facto complainant using wooden logs and hands, causing simple injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the occurrence took place on 07.04.2026, whereas the FIR came to be registered on 16.04.2026, and there is a delay in lodging the FIR. He further submitted that the petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and are ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners used wooden logs and hands to assault the de facto complainant. He further submitted that the injured had left the hospital against medical advice.

5. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, including the fact that the occurrence took place on 07.04.2026 and the FIR came to be registered on 16.04.2026, and that the injured had left the hospital against medical advice, and considering that the occurrence does not appear to be premeditated, as well as the age of petitioners 1 and 2 and the fact that the third petitioner is a woman, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, further custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dharapuram, on condition that the 3/6

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 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 1 and 2 shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 15 days, and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) The third petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate 4/6

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];

(f) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 27.04.2026 cda To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Dharapuram.

2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Alangiyam Police station, Tirupur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda 27.04.2026 6/6