Crl.O.P.No.6051 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.6051 of 2026 1.K.P.Mukesh Surana 2.Kishan 3.Leevo ... Petitioners Vs. State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Pallikaranai Police Station, Pallikaranai District. ... Respondent (Crime No.433 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.433 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Karthick For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) of BNS and 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.433 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that due to landlord tenant 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6051 of 2026 dispute there was wordy quarrel arose between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and due to which, both of them attacked each other and thereby the defacto complainant sustained simple injury. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case due to landlord tenant dispute. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and they are ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that a counter case has been filed by the petitioners against the defacto complainant. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent. 6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) the very incident took place on account of landlord tenant dispute and it appears that on 02.07.2025, in pursuance of wordy quarrel there was an injury sustained by the defacto complainant. At this length of time question of 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6051 of 2026 custodial interrogation does not arise and apart from that the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that there is also counter case filed by this petitioners against the defacto complainant. In such view of the position and also taking into consideration of the age of the first and third petitioners, this Court is inclined to enlarge them on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Alandur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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 C.KUMARAPPAN , J. ssi thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6051 of 2026 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioners shall sign before the respondent police twice a day at 10.30 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., 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 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 09.03.2026 ssi To: 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Alandur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Pallikaranai Police Station, Pallikaranai District 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P.No.6051 of 2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis