Muniraj v. State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(1), 118(2), 351(3) of BNS in Crime No. 16 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that due to land dispute, the petitioners abused and attacked the defacto complainant with wooden log and caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent person and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, he prays for grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and there are no previous cases against the petitioners. However, she vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5Considering the above fact and circumstances of the case and also Page3 of 5 considering the fact that the victim discharged from the hospital, there are no bad antecedents against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palacode, Dharmapuri District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition:

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; Page4 of 5

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions 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 v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS. 17-02-2026 MPA To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Palacode, Dharmapuri District.

¶2State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Mahendramangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District. Cr.No.16 o 2026.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o3873oofo2026 K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. MPA CRLoOPoNo.o3873oofo2026 17-02-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR 1. Muniraj S/o. Ramar, No.3/549, Pikklnayanahalli, Bommanur Post, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. 2. Lakshmi C/o. Chandrasekar, Bommanur Post, No.1/543, Pikkalnayanahalli, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Mahendramangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District. Cr.No.16 o 2026. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: To enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 16 of 2026 on the file of Inspector of Police, Mahendramangalam Police Page2 of 5 Station, Dharmapuri District. For Petitioner(s): Elavarasan .M.R For Respondent(s): M/S.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)