M.Abishake @ Abiseck v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.05.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR M.Abishake @ Abiseck ...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai Police Station, Sivagangai. (Crime No. 50 of 2026)

...Respondent

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sri Ram

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 50 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 118(1), 131, 132, 125 & 351(3) of BNS, read with Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1922, in Crime No.50 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that while the de-facto complainant was sitting and talking with his friends, the petitioner, along with the other accused, approached the de-facto complainant with weapons, assaulted him, and threatened him as well as his friends with dire consequences. They further caused damage to two vehicles belonging to the de-facto complainant. Hence, the present case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that some of the co-accused were granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that it is a case, case in counter. He further submitted that due to a temple dispute, the accused persons assaulted the de-facto complainant and others, threatened them, and caused damage to the vehicles parked there. As a result, 21 persons were injured, including one police officer. He also submitted that the injured persons have been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the issue pertains to a temple dispute, and that it is a case, case in counter, and that the injured persons have already been discharged from the hospital, and some of the co-accused were granted anticipatory bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy was made ready and on further conditions that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the Inspector of Police, Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner is 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

(R V J)

20.05.2026 apd

To

1.The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai

3.The Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai Police Station, Sivagangai.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRLeOP(MD).eNo.e9530eofe2026 oooooR.VIJAYAKUMAR,oJ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooapd oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooORDER oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooIN oooooooooooooooooooooooooCRLoOP(MD)oNo.o9530oofo2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooDateoo:o20.05.2026