VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Manikandan v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Pattiveeranpatti

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
30 March 2026
Bench
P.Dhanabalauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 6282/2026

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6282 of 2026

1.Manikandan

2.Vanitha ... petitioners

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Pattiveeranpatti Police Station, Dindigul District. (Crime No.84 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For petitioners : Mr.N.Vignesh for Mr.L.Prabakaran

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 84 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 118(1), 351(2) of the BNS, 2023, in Crime No.84 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 19.03.2026, due to previous motive, the accused along with other accused abused the defacto complainant and his brother in filthy language and also made assault upon them with iron rod. Hence, they sustained injuries and admitted in the hospital. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, injured in this case has been discharged from the hospital. The petitioners and the defacto complainant are neighbours. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature, however, that the petitioners have no previous case. He would further submit that both parties are neighbours and injured was discharged from the hospital and other accused in this case are absconding. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, there is a dispute between the neighbours, injured was discharged from the hospital and the petitioners have no previous case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul District and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks, thereafter, as and when required for further interrogation: [c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J)

30.03.2026 TM

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Pattiveeranpatti Police Station, Dindigul District. (Crime No.84 of 2026)

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6282 of 2026 Date : 30.03.2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.