Dhilipkumar Alias Thilipkumar v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Vadaseri

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 13902 of 2026

1.Dhilipkumar @ Thilipkumar

2.Kumararaja ... Petitioners

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vadasery Police Station, Kanniyakumari District. (Crime No.244 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Praveenkumar

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar Counsel for State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 244 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 109, 115(2), 118(1) & 351(3) of of BNS, in Crime No.244 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, these petitioners way laid the defacto complainant and attacked him with iron rod on the head of the injured and also other accused brutally attacked him with stick. 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 in no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submitted that counter case has also been registered in Crime No.245 of 2026 on the same police station. The injured was ran away from the hospital. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the accused brutally attacked the defacto complainant and he fearing about his life and also registration of the counter case, he ran way from the hospital. The petitioner No.1 has five previous cases including under two 307 cases and the petitioner No.2 has three previous cases. He opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the bad antecedents against the first petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the first petitioner at this stage.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed as far as first petitioner is concerned.

8.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation as against the second petitioner and there is counter case is also registered, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the second petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [b] the second respondent shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the second respondent shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the second respondent shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the second respondent 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 second respondent in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the second respondent 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

(K R S J)

10.07.2026 TM To

¶1The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil

2.The Inspector of Police, Vadasery Police Station, Kanniyakumari District. (Crime No.244 of 2026)

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

K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13902 of 2026 Date : 10.07.2026