M Krishnamoorthy v. The State Rep. By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. M.Krishnamoorthy

2. Chitra Krishnamoorthy

3. Jeevitha Krishnamoorthy ..Petitioners Vs The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Kaniyur Police Station, Tiruppur District.

[Crime No.104/2026] ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on Bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.104/2026, on the file of Respondent Police Subject to such conditions that may be imposed by this Court. For Petitioners:

Mr.Sujith G For Respondent:

Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 corresponds to Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Crime No.104 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the 1st and 2nd petitioners are husband and wife and the 3rd petitioner is their daughter, who is 21 years old college student. On the date of occurrence, it was alleged that the petitioners herein, owing to previous enmity, abused the de facto complainant, assaulted him with wooden sticks, and caused injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have been implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and is willing to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the injured person has already been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioners. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and noting the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioner and that the injured person has already been discharged from the hospital, this Court is of the view that, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the 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, Madathukulam, Tiruppur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 petitioners 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 1st petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) The 2nd and 3rd petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, as and when required for interrogation; (e) 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];

(f) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

12-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VEDA To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Madathukulam, Tiruppur. 2.Inspector of Police, Kaniyur Police Station, Tiruppur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

VEDA 12-06-2026