Sakthivel v. State Represented By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.30361 of 2025 Sakthivel ... Petitioner Vs.

State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, Thalaivasal Police Station, Salem District.

... Respondent (Crime No.409 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest, in Crime No.409 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.TM.Ramalingam For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2) and 118(1) of BNS 2023 r/w Section 1/4

4 of TNPHW Act in Cr.No.409 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that, due to a quarrel that took place in the bus, the petitioner, along with ten other persons, went to the house of the defacto complainant and attacked him with an iron rod on his head. They also assaulted the family members of the defacto complainant. After the injured was admitted to the hospital, the complaint was lodged. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, and therefore prays for grant of bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the 2/4

respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that, though the defacto complainant was admitted to and discharged from the hospital, he is still undergoing treatment due to the serious head injuries sustained. It is stated that he is currently taking treatment as an inpatient. he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioner herein caused severe injuries to the defacto complainant's head and in view of the fact that the injured is still in the hospital, I am not inclined to grant bail at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 07.11.2025 Vv 3/4

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Attur, Salem District.

2. The Sub Inspector of Police, Thalaivasal Police Station, Salem District.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv 4/4

Crl.O.P.No.30361 of 2025 07.11.2025 5/4