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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.12.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL 1.Nareshkumar 2.Pavishkumar ... Petitioners Vs.

State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, T-14 Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai 600 100.

(Crime No.612 of 2025)

...Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent Police in Crime No.612 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.Vigneshkumar K For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 1/6

329(4), 118(1), 324(4), 351(3) and 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, in Crime No.612 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are brothers and they are neighbours to the defacto complainant. Due to wordy quarrel, the petitioners have attacked the defacto complainant and her family members and abused her using filthy language. Hence the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are an innocent person, they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that it is a case and case in counter. He further submitted that the petitioners are law-abiding citizen and they are ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court; therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/6

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are neighbours, due to wordy quarrel, the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant and her family members. He further submitted that it is a case and case in counter. He added that no previous cases pending against the petitioners and the injured have been discharged from the hospital. However, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the representation made by both sides, the nature of offences, and considering the fact that it is a case and case in counter, and injured has been discharged from the hospital and no previous cases are pending against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

7. 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) 3/6

days from the date on which the order copy was made ready, before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Alandur, 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 conditions that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four (4) weeks and thereafter, as and when required for the interrogation;

[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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;

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

4/6

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of the BNS.

30.12.2025 dna/kas 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 official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

dna/kas Copy to:

1.The Additional Mahila Court Alandur.

2.The Inspector of Police, T-14 Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai 600 100.

(Crime No.612 of 2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai - 600 104.

.1 2 .202 6/6