Murugaperumal v. State By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Murugaperumal S/o.Renganathan, Residing at No.18/4, South street, Veeratikuppam, Muthanai Post, Virudachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

2. Amala W/o.Murugaperumal, Residing at No.18/4, South street, Veeratikuppam, Muthanai Post, Virudachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

3. Manikandan S/o.Renganathan, Residing at No.18/4, South street, Veeratikuppam, Muthanai Post, Virudachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

4. Kasthuri W/o.Renganathan, Residing at No.18/4, South street, Veeratikuppam,

Muthanai Post, Virudachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

5. Akash S/o.Venkatesan, No.57, South Street, Veeratikuppam, Muthanai Post, Virudachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State by, The Inspector of Police, S.H.O Oomangalam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

Cr.No.72 of 2026.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on Anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Cr.No.72 of 2026 on the file of The Inspector of Police, S.H.O.Oomangalam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Silambu Selvan S For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, r/w Section 4 of TNPWH Act in connection with the Cr. No.72 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a dispute between the parties in respect of conducting village temple festival, due to which, there was a wordy quarrel arose between the parties and assaulted each other. Hence the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocents. They have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that it is a case and counter case and injured has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed anticipatory bail for the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that it is a case

and counter case and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, considering the nature of offences, it is case and counter case and injured has been discharged from the hospital, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following 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 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District MunsifCum-Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.

[b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[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 B.N.S.2023.

13-05-2026 VV Note :

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The District Munsif-Cum-Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli.

2. The Inspector of Police, S.H.O Oomangalam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras

P.DHANABAL, J.

VV 13-05-2026