Subramani @ Sudarvalavan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thanthonimalai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Subramani @ Sudarvalavan 2.Deepak Kumar 3.Karthikeyan 4.Ramesh @ Ramesh Kumar

...Petitioners/A1 to A4

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thanthonimalai Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.115 of 2026) ..Respondent For Petitioners :Mr.P.Pratheesh For Respondent :Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.115 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

1/8

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A4, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(1), 351(3) and 296(b) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.115 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a dispute regarding the announcement of certain postings by their respective political party. Due to which, the petitioners and other accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant with wooden sticks and also criminally intimidated him with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent 2/8

persons and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that it is a case in counter case. a counter complaint has been registered against the defacto complainant in Crime No.114 of 2026. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and the first petitioner has three previous cases and the petitioners 2 to 4 have no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

3/8

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and there was a dispute between the parties regarding the announcement of certain postings by their respective political party and the counter complaint has been registered against the defacto complainant in Crime No.114 of 2026 and the petitioners 2 to 4 have no previous cases and though the first petitioner has three previous cases, the same are not similar kind of offences and in all case, he was released on bail and also considering the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a 4/8

sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court No.1, Karur District, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

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

[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 5/8

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].

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

(P D B J) 06.04.2026 vsg 6/8

To 1.The Magistrate Court No.I, Karur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thanthonimalai Police Station, Karur District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7/8

P. DHANABAL, J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6554 of 2026 Date : 06.04.2026 8/8