Kaameshwaran v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Page2 of 6 Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 324(4) of B.N.S. read with Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act in Crime No.72 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that due to the previous enmity with regard to the land and pathway disputes, on 01.03.2026 at about 6.30 p.m., near Mariamman Temple, Soolankurichi Village, the accused persons made a quarrel with the defacto complainant and abused him in filthy language and in furtherance of which, the accused attacked the defacto complainant with hands and wooden logs and caused injuries to him. When the same was questioned by the wife of the defacto complainant, the accused abused her and caused criminal intimidation. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and due to the land dispute, a false case has been registered against the petitioners. He would further submit that according to the prosecution, the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries to him, however, the injured was discharged from the hospital. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police has reiterated the prosecution case and opposed to grant Page3 of 6 anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, he would fairly submit that there is a civil dispute between the parties and the injured was discharged from the hospital.

¶5Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶6From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, it is seen that the present issue revolves around the land dispute, the petitioners and the defacto complainant have civil disputes and the injured was discharged from the hospital. Having considered the fact that the occurrence took place on

01.03.2026, this Court is of the view that at this length of time, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required and therefore, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions:

¶7Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kallakurichi, on condition that the petitioners shall each execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: Page4 of 6

(a) If the petitioners fail 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 appear and sign before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30 p.m., for a period of two weeks;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 15-06-2026 MJS Page5 of 6 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

¶1The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kallakurichi.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Thiyagadurgam Police Station, Kallakurichi District,

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o14678oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. MJS CRLoOPoNo.o14678oofo2026 15-06-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Kaameshwaran S/o. Senthilkumar, No.1/344, Barati Nagar, Sulankuruchi Post, Villupuram, Tamil Nadu. 2. Arunprakash S/o. Arivukarasu, No.1/309, Sangarapuram, Salai, Soolankurichi Post, Soolankurichi, Villupuram, Tamil Nadu. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by: The Inspector of Police Thiyagadurgam Police Station, Kallakurichi District, [Crime No.72/2026] ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.72/2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): R Vivekananthan For Respondent(s): Mr. N. Palanivel, Government Advocate (Criminal Side).