Sathish v. The State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Sathish

2. Arumugam ..Petitioners Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Nangavalli police station, Salem District.

[Crime No.147 of 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 his arrest in Cr.No.147 of 2026 on the file of Nangavalli police station, Salem.

For Petitioners:

Mr.Ganesan T For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b) and 118(2) of BNS (Sections 294(b), 324 of IPC) in Crime No.147 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.05.2026 at about 07:00 p.m., the de facto complainant received telephonic information from his brother that certain individuals were attempting to assault him. Whereupon, the de facto complainant rushed to the spot and questioned the accused persons, who allegedly assaulted him with wooden logs, inflicting grievous injuries on his head and near his eyes. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution's case and submitted that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioners. She further submitted that the injured person has already been discharged from the hospital on 04.06.2026. However, she opposed the grant of 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 submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and noting that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioners, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required at this stage. However, considering the nature of the grievous injuries sustained by the defacto complainant, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to stringent 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 No.1, Mettur 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 fail 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 stay in Coimbatore District and report before the Inspector of Police, R.S. Puram Police Station, Coimbatore City daily at 10:30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days, and thereafter report before the respondent police, 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

29-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VEDA To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Mettur.

2.The Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram Police Station, Coimbatore City.

3.The Inspector of Police, Nangavalli police station, Salem District.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

VEDA 29-06-2026