Selvi v. State, Rep .By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
1. Selvi
2. Raghu
3. Delhi @ Subramani
4. Prabu
5. Munusamy
6. Sivakumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by the Inspector of Police Eriyur Police Station, Dharmapuri District.
(Crime No. 64 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.64 of 2026 on the file of respondent Police.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Sakkarapani V For Respondent(s):
Mr.P.Dhileepan, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b),
115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and 109(1) of BNS, in Crime No.64 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.
The learned counsel for the petitioners, pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners and false implication in the case, seeks indulgence of this Court. He would submit that the defacto complainant proclaims himself as a whistleblower and under that pretext, entered the residence of A1 and misbehaved with A1's wife, which resulted in the occurrence. It is further submitted that there was already a counter case registered against the defacto complainant. He would further submit that even according to the prosecution, the weapons used are only soda bottles and iron rod and the occurrence is not as serious as projected. He would also submit that the co-accused in this case has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.9600 and 9591 of 2026 on 20.04.2026 and that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this court.
3.
The case of the prosecution as put forth by the learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that due to previous enmity arising out of water business run by A1, the defacto complainant formed a group and protested against the same. On 24.03.2026 at about 04.30 PM, while the defacto complainant was in a bakery, the accused persons abused him in filthy language
and attacked him using hands, iron rod, soda bottles and chairs, causing injuries. He would further submit that the injured has been discharged from hospital on 03.04.2026.
4.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.
5.
Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 6.
Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:
[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.
[b] the petitioners shall stay at Coimbatore District and report before the Inspector of Police, E1-Singanallur Police Station, Coimbatore daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation before the respondent police;
[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
29-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VKR
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram.
2.The Inspector of Police, Eriyur Police Station, Dharmapuri District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
VKR 29-04-2026