Saruk @ Shahrukh Nawaz v. State Rep .By The Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP.No.35617 of 2025

1. Saruk @ Shahrukh Nawaz

2. Umar Farook

3. Rishvan.S ... Petitioners Vs.

The State represented by its, Inspector of Police, Karumbukadai Police Station, Coimbatore District.

[Crime No.176 of 2025] ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under 482 of BNSS Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.176 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioners : Mr.K.T.S.Siva Kumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners / Accused 1 to 3 apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 189(2), 296, 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and under Sections 7 and 25(1A) of Arms Act, 1959 in Crime No.176 of 1/7

2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that there existed prior enmity between the de facto complainant and the accused. On the date of occurrence i.e. on 21.11.2025 at about 6.00 p.m., due to previous enmity, it is alleged that the petitioners and other accused took the de facto complainant on a two-wheeler to Nanjundapuram Road and threatened him with deadly weapons and compelling him to call his brother. It is further alleged that when the brother of the de facto complainant arrived at the place of occurrence, the petitioners and other accused assaulted them with a wooden log, thereby caused injuries and abused them by using filthy language. Hence, the complaint.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had not committed any offence as alleged and the petitioners had been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties for their due release and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the due to previous 2/7

enmity that prevailed between the petitioners and the de facto complainant, the petitioners have attacked the de facto complainant and there is a case and counter case. He further submitted that there are 8 previous cases pending as against the 1st petitioner, 3 previous cases pending as against the 2nd petitioner and in respect of the 3rd petitioner, there are 5 previous cases pending and also considering the gravity of offence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.

Considering the representations made by both sides and there is a case and counter case and also considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, injured was discharged from the hospital and that though some previous cases are pending and in all those cases, the petitioners were released on bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 6.

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 of receipt of a copy of this order before the Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (each) (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to 3/7

the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of thirty

(30) days;

[b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade then from disclosing such facts of the Court or to any police officer. [c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action 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 vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

4/7

[g] If the petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

30.12.2025 mac/ssn Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

5/7

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore

2. The Inspector of Police, Karumbukadai Police Station, Coimbatore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 6/7

P.DHANABAL ,J, mac/ssn CRL.OP.No.35617 of 2025 30.12.2025 7/7