Ramachandran v. The State Represented by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296 (b), 115(2), 118(1) & 74 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.64 Page2 of 6 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that due to a land dispute, an altercation arose between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, during which, this petitioner/A4 along with others alleged to have assaulted the defacto complainant with wooden log, thereby causing injuries to her. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that co accused were released on bail by this Court earlier. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and they are willing to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submits that the present case is a counter case arising out of the very same occurrence and that the petitioner has no previous criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the occurrence arose out of a wordy quarrel between the adjacent landowners, which subsequently escalated into an assault. The injured was admitted to the hospital on 14.03.2026 and was discharged on 18.03.2026. The investigation is in Page3 of 6 progress.

5.This Court has considered the submissions made by either side learned Counsel and perused the materials placed before this Court.

6.From the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, it is seen that the present case is a counter case arising out of the same occurrence. The dispute appears to have originated from a quarrel between two adjacent landowners. Though the injured was admitted to the hospital on

14.03.2026, he was discharged on 18.03.2026. Having regard to the date of occurrence, the discharge of the injured from the hospital, the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and considering the stage of investigation, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain following conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Edappadi, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 Page4 of 6 conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fail to surrender before the concerned learned 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(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 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 01-07-2026 JRS Page5 of 6 To

1.The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Edappadi.

2.The Inspector of Police Konganapuram Police Station, Crime no.64 of 2026.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. CRLoOPoNo.o16770oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. JRS CRLoOPoNo.o16770oofo2026 01-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Ramachandran S/o.Seenivasan, D. No.13/100, Koranampatti Post, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District. ..Petitioner/ 4th Accused Vs The State Represented by the Inspector of Police Konganapuram Police Station, Crime no.64 of 2026. ..Respondent/ complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to grant an Anticipatory Bail to this petitioner in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before any court in connection with the case in Crime No.64 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.A Arun For Respondent(s): Ms.R.S.Indira, Govt.Advocate (crl.Side)