Madheswaran v. State Rep.By Its, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b) and 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) BNS, in connection with Cr.No.465 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complaint is doing plastering work in his house by using the petitioners' house lane, which was questioned by the petitioners and at that time there was wordy quarrel and they both attacked each other, in which, defacto complainant sustained head injuries. Hence, a case was registered in Cr.No.465/2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b) and 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) BNS. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a false case has been foisted against petitioners and they have not committed any offence and the defacto complainant only attacked the petitioners and there is a case in counter in Cr.No.466 of 2025. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the defacto complaint is doing plastering work in his house by using the petitioners' house lane, which was questioned by the petitioners and at that time there was wordy quarrel and they both attacked each other, in which, defacto complainant sustained head injuries. There is no previous case pending as against the petitioners and the injured was discharged from the Hospital. However, opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. Considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the injured discharged from the Hospital and also there is case in counter pending against the defacto complainant, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions. 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 made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchengode, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent-police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks. [b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

30.12.2025 cgi To

¶1The Inspector of Police, Tiruchengode Town Police Station, Namakkal District.

¶2The Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchengode.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. P.DHANABAL, J.,

cgi/ksa-2

06.

30.12.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 30.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL 1. Madheswaran 2. Singaravel ... Petitioners Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Tiruchengode Town Police Station, Namakkal District. (Crime No.465/2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.465 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr. W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)