Ganesan v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By Its The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Ganesan 2.Rajathi 3.S.Jubli Shakila 4.Suganthi

...Petitioners/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Viruveedu Town Police Station Dindigul.

(Crime No. 105 of 2026 )

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Venkatesan Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- 1/6

For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 105 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 the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 105 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.05.2026 at about 12.30 p.m., due to a civil dispute between the parties, a wordy quarrel arose between the parties, during which the petitioners and other accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and criminally intimidated him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/6

4. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 105 of 2026. He would further submit that injured was discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and considering the facts that injured was discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be 3/6

released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul, on condition that the petitioners shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[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 4/6

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) 17.06.2026 apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul. 2.The Inspector of Police, Viruveedu Town Police Station Dindigul.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11408 of 2026 Date : 17.06.2026 6/6