Sathish v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 12070 of 2026 1.Sathish 2.M.Chinnasamy 3.G.Manikandan 4.Karthikraja 5.Sundar Bowndurai 6.Manikandan ... Petitioners Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Devakottai Taluk Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(Crime No.184 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.KR.Bharathi Kannan Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for the State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 184 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.184 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 15.06.2026 at about 05.00 p.m., while the defacto complainant was proceeding towards his native village from Devakottai, five unidentified persons intercepted him and attacked him with deadly weapons. Hence, he sustained injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are in no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioners brutally attacked the defacto complainant. Except first and this petitioners all other petitioners were arrested by the respondent police. Therefore, there is no question of granting of 2/6

anticipatory bail to them. The petitioners 1 and 3 have some previous cases. The injured was discharged from the hospital and admitted in another hospital. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

6. Since the petitioners 2, 4, 5 and 6 were arrested, this petition stands dismissed as against them.

7.Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, the injured was discharged from the hospital, thereafter admitted in another hospital, the petitioners 2, 4, 5 and 6 were arrested and though the petitioners 1 and 3 have some previous cases, they were already granted bail in those cases and also considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1 and 3, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners 1 and 3 are ordered to be 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 3/6

ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, on condition that the petitioners 1 and 3 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[b] the petitioners 1 and 3 shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioners 1 and 3 shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners 1 and 3 shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners 1 and 3 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 1 and 3 in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 1 and 3 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 4/6

[(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) 24.06.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Devakottai Taluk Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(Crime No.184 of 2026) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12070 of 2026 Date : 24.06.2026 6/6