Murugesan v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

1. Murugesan S/o. Ponnusamy, No.78/B1, Sidumanahalli, Donnakuttahalli.

Dharmapuri District-636810.

2. Murugesan S/o. Kandhasamy, No.3/231-3, Sidumanahalli, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636810.

3. Poovarasan S/o. Rajendran, No.3/231, Sidumanahalli, Donnakuttahalli Post, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636810.

4. Karthikeyan S/o. Murugesan, No.3/229, Sidumanahalli, Donnakuttahalli Post, Pennnagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636810.

5. Ishwarya W/o. Karthikeyan, No.3/229, Sidumanahalli, Donnakuttahalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636810.

6. Sathya ..Petitioners Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police Eriyur Police Station, Dharmapuri District. Crime No.77 of 2026.

..Respondent PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to grant Anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.77 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent police and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court. For Petitioners :

V Vadivalagia Nambi For Respondent :

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

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 191(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of BNS in Crime No.77 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that, due to a property dispute, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant, attacked him, and also caused injuries. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioners.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond 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 Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order made ready 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 Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity. [b]the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the 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 are 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

07-05-2026 MPA To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram 2.The Inspector of Police Eriyur Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

MPA 07-05-2026