Ramthilak v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.P.Ramthilak 2.V.Palanisamy ..Petitioners/ A3 and A4 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thottiyam Police Station Thottiyam, Trichy District.
(Crime No.107 of 2026) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners:Mr.A.Arun Ramnath Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 107 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. 1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A3 & A4, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, r/w Section 4 of TNPHW Act, 2022, in Crime No.107 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that during the temple festival, on 13.04.2026, the petitioners and other accused persons assembled unlawfully, attacked the defacto complainant with wooden log and knife and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.
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 the 2/7
the co-accused were released on bail by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police fairly submits that the injured persons has been discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous cases. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature. 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 dispute during the temple festival and also considering 3/7
the fact that no previous cases pending against the petitioners and the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and the co-accused were already released on bail by this Court, 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, Thottiyam, 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.
4/7
[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 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 5/7
SCW 5560].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 22.04.2026 vsg To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Thottiyam. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thottiyam Police Station Thottiyam, Trichy District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7990 of 2026 Date : 22.04.2026 7/7