Sivalingam v. State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Sivalingam ..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Kottapatti Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

(Cr.No.51 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal original petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act, praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event on their arrest by the Respondent in Cr.No.51 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent police For Petitioner(s):

Mr.J Pradeep For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, Act, in connection with the Crime No.51 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant was running a catering business under the name of "Rithik Catering", while so, the accused/

petitioner suspected the complainant due to his previous love affair and acquaintance with one Ammu, who had subsequently married the accused. In the circumstances, on 23.04.2026 at about 8.20 p.m, after casting his vote in the Election, the accused had allegedly attacked the complainant, and the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is an innocent person and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that this is the first anticipatory bail application of the petitioner before this Court and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the petitioner may be released on anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature there two previous cases pending against the petitioner which are not similar in nature and the petitioner has been granted bail in all the cases. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, the nature of the offences, injured was discharged from the hospital and that there are two previous cases and the petitioner has already been granted bail in all cases, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following 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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Harur 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.00 a.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[b] the petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[d] the petitioner 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 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 2023.

14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mka/sha To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Harur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kottapatti Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

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.

P.DHANABAL, J.

mka/sha CRL OP No. 12998 of 2026 14-05-2026