Kirubakaran v. The State Rep By, the Sub-Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 296(b), 118(1), 351 (3), 324(1) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.148 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

¶2It is the case of the prosecution that on 5.6.26, at about 9 am during the temple chariot procession, the petitioner intercepted the defacto complainant, picked up a wordy altercation, and assaulted him with a brick and hands. It is the further alleged that the petitioner stabbed the defacto complainant on his stomach with a knife and criminally intimidated him with dire consequences. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were innocent and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further would submit that the incident occurred during a village festival, a family dispute in a limited setting. The injured was admitted to the hospital on Page3 of 6

06.06.2026 and discharged on 11.06.2026, sustaining only minor injuries. The second and third petitioners are women and they are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that no previous cases have been registered against the petitioners. She further submits that the petitioners assaulted not only the defacto complainant but also her mother. Despite the injuries being described as simple, the assault took place during a village festival, which may have aggravated the situation. Hence she opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶6From the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) the petitioner does not have any previous cases and that the incident reportedly took place during a village festival. According to the submission made by the learned government advocate, the injured was admitted to the hospital on 06.06.2026 and discharged on 11.06.2026. The learned government advocate further submits that the petitioners have also assaulted the defacto complainant's mother. Though allegations are made against the petitioners, the second and third petitioners, being women, and considering that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court, after considering the total facts and circumstances of the case, is of the view that custodial interrogation of the Page4 of 6 petitioners is not necessary. Hence this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Arani, Tiruvannamalai district on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioners 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of four 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 Page5 of 6 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 30-06-2026 JRS To

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Arani, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶2The Sub-Inspector Of Police Arani Taluk Police Station, Thiruvannamalai. Crime No.148 of 2026

¶3The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. CRLoOPoNo.o16587oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. JRS CRLoOPoNo.o16587oofo2026 30-06-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Kirubakaran S/o Palani. Residing atNo.2/92, , Mariyamman Koil, Kalpoondi, Molugampoondi Tiruvannamali -632317 2. P.Lavanya D/o Palani, Residing atNo.2/92, Mariyamman Koil, Kalpoondi, Molugampoondi, Tiruvannamali -632317 3. K.Santhiya S/o Kirubakaran, Residing atNo.2/92, Mariyamman Koil, Kalpoondi, Molugampoondi, Tiruvannamali -632317 ..Petitioners/ Accused 1 to 3 Vs The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police Arani Taluk Police Station, Thiruvannamalai. Page2 of 6 Crime No.148 of 2026 ..Respondent/ Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of petitioners arrest in Crime No.231 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.P Jayachandran For Respondent(s): MS.R.S.INDIRA, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)