Sathish, v. State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Sathish, S/o. Perumal, Mettu Street, Thakkandarayapuram Village, Melpathi Post, Vandavasi Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District - 604505.

2. Devi W/o. Kannan, Mettu Street, Thakkandarayapuram Village, Melpathi Post, Vandavasi Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District - 604505.

3. Kaviyarasi D/o. Kannan, Mettu Street, Thakkandarayapuram Village, Melpathi Post, Vandavasi Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District - 604505.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police Vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

Crime No.0044 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with in Crime NO.0044 of 206 on the file of Respondent Police and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

M/S. V.R. Appaswamee For Respondent(s):

MR.N.PALANIVEL, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 117(2) and 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.0044 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that due to family dispute, the defacto complainant went to the house of the petitioners in an inebriated condition and picked up a wordy quarrel with them. During the course of the altercation, the first petitioner, assaulted the defacto complainant on his stomach, thereby causing injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant is the husband of the second petitioner, uncle of the first petitioner and the father of the third petitioner. He further submitted that, owing to the family dispute, the defacto complainant has falsely implicated the petitioners by lodging the present complaint alleging that they had assaulted him. 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

occurrence took place on 08.06.2026 and that the defacto complainant is still undergoing treatment in the hospital. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner

5. Considering the above aspects and in view of the fact that the injured is still undergoing treatment, this Court is of the firm that it is premature to consider the anticipatory bail petition at this stage. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 24-06-2026 DRL To 1.The Sub-Inspector Of Police Vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 24-06-2026