Mr. Sethu @ Assault Sethu v. State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 310(2) and 4 of TNPHW @ to under Section 310(2), 324(4), 351(3), 329(4) of BNS, Act and Section 4 of TNPHW in Crime No. 211 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. Page2 of 6

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with other persons unlawfully assembled and committed trespass into the defacto complainant's property. It is alleged that petitioners intimidated and threatened the defacto complainant and also robbed a cell phone and cash. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that petitioners attacked the defacto complainant and snatched his cell phone. He submits that the property has been recovered. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. Page3 of 6

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the allegation against the petitioners is that they have trespassed into the complainant's property and snatched cell phone. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) fairly submitted that cell phone has been recovered subsequently however, he objects this application on the ground that previous cases were pending against A1 and A2 and they are History Sheeters. Hence, Considering the bad antecedent against A1 and A2, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1 and 2. Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition stands dismissed as against petitioners 1 and 2. As far as petitioners 3 to 5 are concerned, they have no criminal antecedent and upon the fact that property has been recovered, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 3 to 5, subject to certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioners 3 to 5 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Krishnagiri on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of Page4 of 6 the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioners fails 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 3 to 5 shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30pm until further orders.

(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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 01-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order nr Page5 of 6 To:

¶1The Judicial Magistrate-II, Krishnagiri.

¶2The Inspector of Police Krishnagiri Taluk Police Station, Krishnagiri Distrct.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o16680oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. NR CRLoOPoNo.o16680oofo2026 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 1. Mr. Sethu @ Assault Sethu 2. Mr. Sudhakar Appu 3. Mr. Krishnamurthy Bikki, 4. Mr. Kadhar Basha 5. Mr.Nadeshkumar @ Thirumalai ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Krishnagiri Taluk Police Station, Krishnagiri Distrct. Crime No.211 of 2025 ..Respondent(s) 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 the arrest in Crime No.211 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): M.P. Saravanan For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.side)