← Library
Madras High Court/15422/2026granted

Palaniyammal v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

2026-06-18Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Palaniyammal

2. Ramya

3. Kumar ..Petitioners Vs State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Tharamangalam Police Station, Salem.

[Crime No.332 of 2026] ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.332 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Tharamangalam Police Station, Salem.

For Petitioners:

Mr. Muthukumar Raja For Respondent:

Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of BNS in Crime No.332 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a property dispute between the de facto complainant family and the petitioners. On the date of occurrence on 06.06.2026, the petitioners assaulted the de facto complainant and caused injury. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed 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 entire issue erupted only due to the children playing games. He further submitted that no one sustained any injuries. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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, taking into consideration of the totality of the circumstances, and upon the fact that no one sustained any injuries, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required at this stage. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, 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 Judicial Magistrate, Omalur, 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

18-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SHL To:

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Omalur

2. The Inspector of Police, Tharamangalam Police Station, Salem.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

SHL 18-06-2026