Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15-07-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 Sridhar S/o.sarvanamuthu. ... Petitioner Vs. The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Sendamangalam Police Station, Namakkal District. ... Respondent (Crime No.135 of 2026) 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 arrest pending investigation in Crime No.135 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Dhasarathan For Respondent : Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 117(3) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.135 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 2. According to the prosecution case, on 03.06.2026 at about 9.30 am , when the defacto complainant was doing agriculture work in his land, at that 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 time the petitioners father came and pull down him, in which he was admitted in the hospital. On 01.07.2026, the petitioners came to the hospital and assaulted the defacto complainant with their hands and leg and the defacto complainant’s teeth was broken. Based on defacto complianant’s complainant, a case has been registered on 02.07.2026. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A2 and is the father of A1. The petitioner and the de facto complainant are close relatives, as the petitioner's brother is the father of the de facto complainant. The occurrence arose out of a long-standing land dispute between the parties. Though the prosecution alleges that the petitioner assaulted the de facto complainant during the altercation, the complaint was lodged only on 02.07.2026, whereas the alleged occurrence took place on 30.06.2026. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that one previous case has been registered against the petitioner. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) further submitted that the de facto complainant sustained injuries in the occurrence and was admitted to the hospital, from where he was discharged only on 09.07.2026. The delay in lodging the complaint was on account of the injured undergoing treatment. Accordingly, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. From both side submissions, it is seen that owing to a land dispute between the parties, an altercation ensued, during which the de facto complainant was allegedly assaulted. The injured was admitted to the hospital and was discharged only on 09.07.2026. Though the alleged occurrence took place on 30.06.2026, the complaint came to be registered only on 02.07.2026. Considering the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, that there is a delay in the registration of the FIR, and that the injured has since been discharged from the hospital, this Court is of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sendamangalam, Namakkal District, 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 petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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 thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 15-07-2026 jrs To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-, Sendamangalam, Namakkal District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sendamangalam Police Station, Namakkal District. (Crime No.135 of 2026) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18606 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN , J. jrs Crl.OP.No.18606 of 2026 15-07-2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis