V Nishanth v. The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police
CRL OP/10366/2026 · 2026-04-30
G K Ilanthiraiyan
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6552 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6552 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026 V.Nishanth ...Petitioner Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, K-11, CMBT Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.263 of 2026) ...Respondent Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in respect of the FIR in Crime No.263 of 2026, pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Porchelvan.N For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 140(1), 127(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) & 190 of BNS in Crime No.263 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. Page No.1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to a money dispute, the petitioner and other accused persons abused the de facto complainant and assaulted him, causing injuries. Hence the case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case solely based on the alleged confession statement of the co-accused. He further submitted that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and no injuries were sustained by the de facto complainant during the alleged occurrence. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegation and further taking note of the fact that no Page No.2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026 injuries were caused during the alleged occurrence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 7.
Accordingly, the 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 V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; [b] 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; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond during during investigation or trial; Page No.3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026 [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 30.04.2026 skt To:
1. The V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2. The Inspector of Police, K-11, CMBT Police Station, Chennai. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page No.4 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. skt Crl.O.P.No.10366 of 2026 30.04.2026 Page No.5 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis