Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44230 (MAD)

Sharan v. State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

CRL OP/15914/2026 · 2026-06-24

C Kumarappan

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 15914 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 15914 of 2026 Sharan S/o. Balakumar, No.3/18, Ranga Pannadi Street, Kuruchi, Sundarapuram, Coimbatore South, Coimbatore District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Sundarapuram Police Station, Coimbatore District. Crime No.212 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.212 of 2026 pending investigation on the file the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): MR. M.N. Balakrishnan For Respondent(s): MR.N.PALANIVEL, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE) ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.212 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15914 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel that arose in connection with the engagement of a band music troupe after the performance had concluded, the accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language, assaulted him, and criminally intimidated him with dire consequences. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the defacto complainant is still undergoing treatment in the hospital. He further submitted that the petitioner has one previous case pending against him. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner 5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions. 6. From the submission made by the learned Government Advocate https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15914 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 (Crl.Side), it is seen that the injured is still taking treatment in the hospital. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it is too premature to consider the anticipatory bail application. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24-06-2026 DRL To 1.The Inspector of Police Sundarapuram Police Station, Coimbatore District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15914 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. DRL CRL OP No. 15914 of 2026 24-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis