Nachimuthu v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 30.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

1. Nachimuthu

2. Karthi ... Petitioners Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Uthiyur Police Station, Tiruppur District (Crime No.225/2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.225 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Silambu Selvan For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) *****

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 296(b), 1/5

115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, in connection with Cr.No.225 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's father is running a Bar on the land of A1 and there was dispute between them, due to which, on 13.11.2025, three unknown persons came and attacked the defacto complainant and caused injury. Hence, a case was registered in Cr.No.225/2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have not involved in any offence as alleged by the respondent police and no previous case is pending against the petitioners. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant with wooden log due to previous enmity. Further injured discharged from the hospital and there is no previous case pending against the petitioners. Hence he 2/5

opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. Considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the injured discharged from the Hospital and also there is no previous case pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate, Kangeyam, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent-police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks. [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 3/5

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to 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] 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

30.12.2025 cgi To

1. The The Inspector of Police, Uthiyur Police Station, Tiruppur District.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Kangeyam.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J., cgi/ksa-2 06.

30.12.2025 5/5