Vignesh v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.32538 of 2025 Vignesh ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep., by The Inspector of Police, T-14 Mangadu Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

(Crime No.841 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.841 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Raja For Respondent :

Mr.L.Baskaram, Government Advocate (Criminal 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), 351(2) of BNS r/w 75 & 87 of JJ Act in Crime No.841 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's brother is employed abroad and that his wife, Junath, is allegedly having an illicit relationship with the petitioner, who runs a Xerox shop at Mangadu. It is further alleged that on 27.08.2025, when Junath visited the shop along with her child, the petitioner assaulted the child, causing a fracture, and criminally threatened her. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the alleged occurrence is stated to have taken place two months ago, however, the FIR has been registered only in the month of October, and the complaint has been falsely foisted against the petitioner. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A2, and that A1 is absconding. He further submitted that the investigation is at initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/4

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

6. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the photographs and medical records filed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) in respect of the injuries sustained by the minor child, this Court finds that the child has suffered grievous injuries, including fracture of hand and gravity of the allegations and the fact that A1 is absconding, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 27.11.2025 kmm To 1.The Inspector of Police, T-14 Mangadu Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

kmm Crl.O.P.No.32538 of 2025 27.11.2025 4/4