K.P. Mallaiyan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 7844 of 2026 1.K.P.Mallaiyan 2.K.P.Palanisamy 3.V.Mallaiyan ... Petitioners Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.126 of 2026)
...Respondents/Complainant
For Petitioners : Mr.P.Surya, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 126 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for 1/5
the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 296(b), 118(1), 324(4) and 351(3) BNS, 2023 in Crime No.126 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous dispute, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant and attacked them, thereby the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are in no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Due to previous enmity, the present case has been foisted against the petitioners. There is civil case in O.S.No.7 of 2024 is pending on the file of the Sub Court, Kodaikanal. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the offences are grave in nature. Due to previous enmity the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant. The injured was discharged from the hospital. He opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Investigation is still pending. The 2/5
petitioner has no previous case.
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, considering that there is land dispute between the parties, injured was discharged from the hospital, there is no previous case against the petitioners, and also considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, 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 sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday, for a period of four weeks, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
3/5
[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 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 thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 21.04.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Kodaikanal, Dindigul District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
P. DHANABAL, J.
TM
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7844 of 2026 Date : 21.04.2026 5/5