Vijay @ Vijayan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Chinnamanur
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.05.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Vijay @ Vijayan, S/o.Kannan ... Petitioner/A2 Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.By, the Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, Theni District.
(Crime No.301 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Sarathkumar G, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervenor : Mr.I.Anthony Prabu, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS 1/7
PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.301 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.301 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.04.2026, while the defacto complainant and his family members had gone to worship at the Muthumariamman Temple on the eve of the festival celebration, the petitioner and the other accused passed obscene comments against them. When this was questioned by the de-facto complainant and his family members, the petitioner and the other accused abused them in filthy language and also assaulted them. Hence, the present case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is 2/7
ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner and the other accused passed obscene comments against the family members of the defacto complainant. When this was questioned, they abused the de-facto complainant and his family members in filthy language and also assaulted them, as a result of which they sustained injuries. He further submitted that some of the accused have already been arrested. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the injured has been undergoing treatment in a private hospital. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that some of the accused have already been arrested, and that the petitioner is ready to deposit a certain amount to the credit of crime 3/7
number, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy was made ready and on further conditions that:
[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.301 of 2026 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, Theni District. Upon such deposit, the learned Magistrate shall accept the sureties 4/7
furnished by the petitioner. Further, the de-facto complainant/victim is at liberty to withdraw the said amount by filing an appropriate application before the trial Court;
[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner is 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 5/7
[(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
(S S Y J) 06.05.2026 mkn To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, Theni District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, Theni District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
S.SRIMATHY, J.
mkn
ORDER
IN 06.05.2026 7/7