Syedali v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Syedali

2. Kaja Mydeen

3. Sheik Mohaideen ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented by The Inspector Of Police Mandarakuppam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No.93 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioners/Accused on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.93 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.P.Krishnakumar For Respondent(s):

M/s.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Criminal side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296 (b), 115 (2), 118 (1), 351 (3), 324 (4) of BNS 2023, in Crime No.93 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioners abused and assaulted the defacto-complainant. Consequently, the defacto-complainant admitted to the hospital. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and had been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and are ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that while the first and third petitioners have no bad antecedents, the second petitioner has one previous case under the POCSO Act. He further submitted that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.

Considering the totality of the circumstances, the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital, the fact that the first and third petitioners have no bad antecedents, and that the occurrence took place on 21.05.2026, this Court is of the firm view that the custodial interrogation of the first and third petitioners is not necessary at this juncture. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the first and third petitioners, subject to certain conditions. Since, the second petitioner has one previous case, this Court is not inclined to grant him anticipatory bail. Consequently, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as against the second petitioner.

6.Accordingly, the first and third petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli, on condition that the first and third petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each , with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the first and third petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The first and third petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily Morning at 10.30 am and Evening at 5.30 pm. for a period of one month; thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the first and third petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the first and third petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the first and third petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 10-06-2026 ep

To 1.The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli. 2.The Inspector Of Police Mandarakuppam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

EP 10-06-2026