Katturaja v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Sanarpatti

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/04/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Katturaja, S/o.Vellimalai, Korachinnampatti,Kanavaipatti, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District..

2. Vellathai, D/o.Vellaichamy, Korachinnampatti,Kanavaipatti, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District..

3. Natchammal, W/o.Vellimalai, Korachinnampatti,Kanavaipatti, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District..

... Petitioners/A6, 7 & 9 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Sanarpatti Police Station, Sanarpatti, Dindigul East Dindigul District.

(Crime No.156 of 2026).

... Respondent/Complainant 1/8

For Petitioner : MR.R.Karantharaja, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-33 AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.

156 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A6, A7 and A9, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, and Section 4 of TNPWH Act, in Crime No.156 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, due to family dispute, a wordy quarrel arose between the parties and the petitioners and other accused persons abused the 2/8

defacto complainant in filthy language and also assaulted him and caused injuries 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 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.155 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 3/8

the petitioners have one previous cases. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and there was a family dispute between the parties and the counter complaint has been registered against the defacto complainant in Crime No.155 of 2026 and though the petitioners have previous case, the same is not similar kind of offence and they were released on bail and also considering the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and the investigation might have been completed and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to 4/8

the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Dindigul, 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 5/8

with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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) 20.04.2026 VSG 6/8

TO 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Dindigul, 2.The Inspector of Police, Sanarpatti Police Station, Sanarpatti, Dindigul East Dindigul 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.7685 of 2026 Date : 20/04/2026 8/8