Manikandan @ Chinnakakka v. State Rep.By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-05-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Manikandan @ Chinnakakka, S/o.Kanagaraj ..Petitioner Vs State rep. by its, Inspector of Police, Neyveli Thermal Police Station, Cuddalore District.
Crime No.170 of 2025.
..Respondent Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.170 of 2025 on the file of respondent police. For Petitioner :
Mr.R.Gokulnath For Respondent :
Mr.S.Balaji, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.170 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
Page No.1 of 6
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner and other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and attacked him with a knife. The victim sustained injuries near his eyes, and was subsequently admitted to the hospital. Hence, the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has five previous cases pending against him. He further submitted that this is the third anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner and if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he may abscond and commit similar offences in the future. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
Page No.2 of 6
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offences and also considering the fact that though there are five previous cases pending against the petitioner, as he has been granted bail in all the said cases and further taking note of the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 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 petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty day and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;
Page No.3 of 6
[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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]; [g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order sp Page No.4 of 6
To
1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli.
2. The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Thermal Police Station, Cuddalore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.
Page No.5 of 6
P.DHANABAL, J.
sp 14-05-2026 Page No.6 of 6