G.Harish Kumar v. State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN G.Harish Kumar ..Petitioner Vs State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, M3, Puzhal Police Station, Chennai. Crime No.423 of 2026.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/accused on anticipatory bail in Crime No.423 of 2026 in event of his arrest and pending investigation before the respondent police.

For Petitioner:

Mr.V.Muthupandi For Respondent:

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.423 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to prior enmity between the petitioner, the other accused and the defacto complainant, both parties abused

each other in filthy language and assaulted one another with hands, stones, and wooden logs on the date of the occurrence. In the said incident, the defacto complainant sustained only simple injuries and returned home on the very same day after receiving outpatient treatment. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. It is further submitted that co-accused has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No.13940 of 2026 dated 29.05.2026. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution's case and submitted that the injured person was discharged from the hospital on 24.05.2026. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides that the injured person was discharged from the hospital on 24.05.2026 and the fact that the coaccused has already been granted anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No.13940 of 2026 dated 29.05.2026, this Court is of the firm view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned District Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

29-06-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, M3, Puzhal Police Station, Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

3. The District Magistrate / Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 29-06-2026