K.Kumaresan v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.31097 of 2025 K.Kumaresan ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Pachal Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

... Respondent (Crime No.190 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.190 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mariappan For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 85, 109(1) of the BNS, 2023 in Crime No.190 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is the husband of the defacto complainant's daughter and that, due to a matrimonial dispute, he 1/6

attacked his wife with a knife, causing multiple injuries. The victim was admitted to the Government Medical College and Hospital, Thiruvannamalai, and was undergoing treatment. Based on the statement recorded from the victim's mother, the present case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) submitted that, having regard to the matrimonial dispute, the petitioner caused severe injuries to the victim. It was further submitted that the victim has been discharged and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

2/6

6. Considering the manner in which the occurrence had taken place and the nature of injuries sustained by the victim, this Court is of the view that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would hamper the investigation. Since the investigation is not yet completed, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.11.2025 kmm To

1. The Inspector of Police, Pachal Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/6

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

kmm Crl.O.P.No.31097 of 2025 14.11.2025 4/6