Robart v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13-05-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Robart 2.Subathra 3.Babu ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of police, Shevapet Police station, Salem district.
Crime No.018/2026.
..Respondent(s) To enlarge the Petitioners on Anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.018 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.C.R.Gokulvisvas For Respondent(s):
Mr.M.Illiyas for Intervenor Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. side)
ORDER
The petitioners / Accused, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2) and 109(1) of BNS Act, 2023 on the file of respondent, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, who is an
advocate practicing in criminal courts, lodged a complaint stating that the petitioners frequently picked up quarrels with him regarding C.C.No.1097 of 2023 pending before Judicial Magistrate Court-III. The petitioners repeatedly threatened to kill him, if he continued to appear in the said case. On 23.02.2026 at 4:45 a.m., the petitioners came near his house, abused him, criminally intimidated him, and wrongfully restrained him. The complainant sustained injuries and was admitted to hospital, following which FIR in Crime No.018/2026 was registered. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to professional rivalry. He undertakes not to abscond or evade the process of law and is willing to furnish sufficient sureties for his appearance. The petitioner further undertakes not to tamper with or influence the prosecution witnesses in any manner. He is ready to cooperate with the respondent police for investigation as and when required. Thus, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. Mr.M.Illiyas, learned counsel for the intervenor would submit that offences are grave in nature, and hence, prays for dismissal of this petition.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and further submitted that injured has
been discharged from the hospital, investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and considering the fact that injured have been discharged from the hospital, and no previous cases are pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:
8. 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 Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem, on condition that the petitioners shall execute 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police at 10 a.m., every Saturday for a period of 4 weeks; [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 them 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 themselves 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 B.N.S.2023.
13-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order GD 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.Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem.
2.The Inspector of police, Shevapet Police station, Salem district.
3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
P.DHANABAL, J.
GD 13-05-2026