Kannan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 28/05/2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.POORNIMA Kannan, S/o.Perumal, 8/83, North Street, Koliyankulam, Thankkarkulam, Tirunelveli District.

... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.By, The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Panagudi, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.422 of 2025).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.S.Palanivelayutham, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS 1/4

PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.422 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Sole Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 1158(2), 109

(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.422 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant, who is his wife. Due to a family quarrel, he brutally attacked his wife and child and caused 8 to 9 striches over her head. Due to which, she was admitted in the hospital and subsequently discharged. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 26.04.2025. Hence, he seeks bail.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that due to family quarrel, the petitioner/husband brutally attacked the defacto complainant/wife, due to which, she sustained injuries and was admitted in the hospital. He would further submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. . 2/4

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side. Perused the documents placed on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions made by the learned counsels and the petitioner brutally attacked the defacto complainant/wife, this Court do not wish to show any leniency to the petitioner and not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. sd/- 28/05/2025 / TRUE COPY / /06/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

MAC TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANAGUDI POLICE STATION, PANAGUDI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON AT PALAYAMKOTTAI, TIRUNELVLEI DISTRICT.

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

3/4

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8658 of 2025 Date :28/05/2025 SA/SAR. /02.06.2025/4P/4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 4/4