M.Naveen Kumar v. The State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Naveen Kumar ..Petitioner Vs The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, T-1 Ambattur Police Station, Redhills District.

Cr.No.346/2025.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.346/2025 on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner:

Ms.M.Kruthika For Respondent:

Ms.R.S.Indira, Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 194 of BNSS and altered to 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 105, 351(3) of BNS r/w 190 of BNS in Crime No.346 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was running a bed

company, where the deceased was one of their employee. The nature of work of the employees is to sell the beds using company's auto and remit the sale proceeds. On the date of occurrence on 15.04.2025, the deceased did not return after sales. The petitioner traced the deceased's location using GPS. It is alleged that there was a quarrel between the petitioner and the de facto complainant with regard to the misappropriation of money. It is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences and assaulted him with a cobweb stick. As a result, he fell down and fainted and was taken to his house, subsequently succumbed to death. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially FIR came to be registered only under section 194 of BNSS subsequently altered to 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 105, 351(3) of BNS r/w 190 of BNS. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that other accused have already been enlarged on bail, and there is no overt act against this petitioner in the alteration report. He submitted that A1 to A5 have been enlarged on bail in Crl.OP.No.15801 of 2025 dated 19.06.2025. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that investigation is completed and Charge sheet is yet to be filed. There is also serious dispute in

respect of enlargement of bail of other accused. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, it is observed that the main contention put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no overt act against this petitioner in the alteration Report and further more there is no dispute in respect of bail of other accused and apart from that investigation has been completed. Taking into consideration of the totality of the circumstances and for the occurrence took place on 15.04.2025, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. 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 Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur, 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, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days and 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 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.

17-06-2026 SHL

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL To:

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur

2. The Inspector of Police, T-1 Ambattur Police Station, Redhills District.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras 17-06-2026