Vishnu v. The State Rep.By Its Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Vishnu No.2/23, Kanni Kovil Street, Senthangudi, Srikali, Vilandhidasa Samuthiram, Nagapattinam-609 111.

and 6 Others 2.Vijay S/o.Thangamani, No.2/23 Kanni Kovil Street, Senthangudi, Sirkali, Vilandhidasa Samuthiram, Nagapattinam-609 111.

3.A.Karthirvel S/o.Alagesan, No.833, 2nd street, Melmuthaanur Mothakkal, Tiruvannamalai-606 708.

4.Partheepan S/o.Agoram, 2 Madhakadi Street, Thaikkal Sirkali, Nallanayakipuram, Nagapattinam, Anaikaranchatram-609 102.

5.Vimala W/o.Thangamani, No.2/23, Kanni Kovil Street, Senthangudi, Srikali, Vilandhidasa Samuthiram, Nagapattinam-609111.

6.Santhiya Balakrishnan D/o.Balakrishnan, 101 Madhakadi Street, Thaikkal, Mudhalaimedu, Anaikaranchatram, Nagapattinam-609 102.

7.Priyatharshini D/o.Thangamani, No.2/23, Kanni Koil Street, Senthangudi, Srikali, Vilandhidasa Samuthiram, Nagapattinam-609 111.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State rep.by its Inspector of Police, Kollidam Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District-609 102.

Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.Not known of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.N.Krishna Moorthy For Respondent(s):

M/S.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 109 and 351 of of BNS in Crime No. not known of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to wordy quarrel, the petitioners abused and attacked the defacto complainant with iron rod and caused grievous injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the defacto complainant is a constant troublemaker in the locality. Hence, they questioned the defacto complainant. At the time the quarrel arose, and for their self defence attacked the defacto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioners are not having any previous case. Therefore, he prays for grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the petitioner 1 to 4 are ranked as A1 to A4 and they attacked the defacto complainant and now the injured has been discharged from the hospital, and the investigation in this case is pending. She further submitted that the petitioners 5 to 7 are not an accused in this case.

5. Considering the fact that the victim discharged from the hospital, and the petitioners 1 to 4 are not having any previous case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1 to 4 with certain conditions.

6. As far as the petitioners 5 to 7 is concerned, the petition is dismissed since it is stated that they are not an accused in this case.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners 1 to 4 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 made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mayiladuthurai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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 report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, 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 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 accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

05-01-2026 Mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.Judicial Magistrate, Mayiladuthurai.

2.The State rep.by its Inspector of Police, Kollidam Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District-609 102.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 34725 of 05-01-2026