A.Sarathkumar v. State Rep.By,

ORDER The petitioners / Accused No. 1 to 2, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS Act on the file of respondent, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 21.04.2026, due to a previous dispute, the petitioners picked up a quarrel with the defacto complainant. In furtherance of common intention, the petitioners abused the complainant in Page1 of 5 filthy language and attacked him with a dangerous weapon, causing injuries. The complainant was admitted to hospital for treatment. Based on his complaint, the respondent police registered a case against the petitioners and took up investigation. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the complainant attempted to attack the petitioners with a dangerous weapon, and the petitioners acted only in self-defense. The petitioners had no prior motive to attack and undertake to cooperate with investigation and not tamper with evidence. Thus, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that investigation is pending, the offences are grave in nature, injured has been discharged from the hospital and there is no previous cases pending against the petitioners. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

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

¶6Considering the representations made on either side, considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and considering the fact that injured has been discharged from the hospital and that there is no previous cases pending against this petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Page2 of 5 petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

¶7Accordingly, the petitioners 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 ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Poonamallee, on condition that the petitioners shall execute separate 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police at 10 a.m., every Saturday for a period of 4 weeks; [b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 themselves Page3 of 5 as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023. 13-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order GD Note:

¶1Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶2All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code. To

1.Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Poonamallee.

2.Inspector of Police, R-9, Valasaravakkam Police Station, Chennai. Cr.No.Not Known of 2026.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai. Page4 of 5 CRLoOPoNo.o11714oofo2026 P.DHANABAL,oJ. GD CRLoOPoNo.o11714oofo2026 13-05-2026 Page5oofo5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-05-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.A.Sarathkumar 2.A.Saranraj ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep.by, Inspector of Police, R-9, Valasaravakkam Police Station, Chennai. Cr.No.Not Known of 2026. ..Respondent(s) To enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event their arrest in Cr.No.not known of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Kasirajan S For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. side)