← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10694/2026granted

Niranjan @ Chinnakannuran v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2026-06-10Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Niranjan @ Chinnakannuran

2. Rishipandi

3. Saravanakumar ... Petitioners/Accused Rank Not Known Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Sellur Police Station, Madurai District.

Cr.No.291/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.291/2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Pradeep S, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners / Accused, who were arrested and remanded to 1/6

judicial custody on 19.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109 and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.291 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.04.2026, due to previous enmity, the petitioners and the other accused are said to have abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and assaulted him with a knife and an aruval and thereby, caused grievous injuries to him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that except the allegation against the petitioners herein that they kicked the victim no other allegation is made against them and the injured was discharged from the hospital and they have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.04.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioners. 2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to previous enmity, the petitioners and the other accused abused and assaulted the defacto complainant with a knife and an aruval and thereby, caused grievous injuries to him and the first petitioner has 3 previous cases and the second petitioner has 1 previous case and the third petitioner has 13 previous cases and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioners. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and there is a dispute between the parties and the injured was discharged from the hospital and though the petitioners have some previous cases, all the cases are not a similar kind of offences and in those cases, they were already released on bail and the 3/6

allegation against the petitioners herein is that they only kicked the victim and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on 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 No.2, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders. [c] the petitioners shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which they are suspected;

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted 4/6

with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[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 BNS.

(P D B J) 10.06.2026 dss P. DHANABAL,J DSS 5/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Sellur Police Station, Madurai District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10694 of 2026 Date : 10/06/2026 6/6