Nandakumar v. The State Rep by Superintendent of Police

ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS Act in Crime No.123 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute, wordy quarrel arose between the parties.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner are innocent persons and a false case has been foisted against the petitioners and that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

¶4Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case, submitted that the injured discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions. Page3 of 6

¶6Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the occurrence took place on 03.07.2026 and considering the fact that the injured discharged from the hospital, this Court is of the firm view that, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate at Sholinghur on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two suretieseach, 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 slip (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; Page4 of 6

(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am 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 are 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 09-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MFA Page5 of 6 To

¶1The Judicial Magistrate at Sholinghur.

¶2The Inspector of Police Kondapalayam Police Station, Ranipet District

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai. CRLoOPoNo.o17673oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. MFA CRLoOPoNo.o17673oofo2026 09-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Nandakumar S/o. Ranganathan, Puivalam Village, Sholinghur Taluk, Ranipet District. 2. Kumaresan S/o. Narasiman, Puivalam Village, Sholinghur Taluk, Ranipet District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police Kondapalayam Police Station, Ranipet District. Crime No.123 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the Petitioners on Bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 123 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): G.P. Sivakumar For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel GovernmentAdvocate (Crl.Side) Page2 of 6