Nedunchezhiyan v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296 (b), 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 118(1), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.115 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioners is that due to election dispute, an altercation arose between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, during which, these petitioners alleged to have assaulted the defacto complainant with wooden log, thereby causing injuries to her. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the Page3 of 6 petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that cthe occurrence had taken place due to an election dispute. It is submitted that the petitioners/A2 and A3 have no criminal antecedents. The injured was discharged from the hospital on the same day. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and they are willing to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and submitted that the injured was discharged on the date of occurrence itself. However, he would oppose the application on the ground that the 1st and 4th petitioners are having criminal antecedents. It is submitted that A4 is involved in two previous cases and A1 is involved in four previous cases.

5.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side). It is seen that the entire occurrence had arisen out of an election-related dispute. The FIR came to be registered on

27.04.2026 and, considering the lapse of time from the date of occurrence, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required at this stage. Though the criminal antecedents of A1 and A4 have been brought to the notice of this Court, considering the nature of the occurrence, which took place during an Page4 of 6 election dispute, and the fact that the injured was discharged on the same day, this Court is of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain following conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gingee, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioners fail 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate Page5 of 6 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 10-07-2026 JRS To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Gingee.

2.The Inspector of Police Valathy Police Station, Villupuram. Crime No.115 of 2026

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. CRLoOPoNo.o17857oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. JRS CRLoOPoNo.o17857oofo2026 10-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Nedunchezhiyan S/o Pavunan, No.1, Pownan Street, Valathy, Melmalaiyanur Taluk, Villupuram District. 2. Ravanan No.1, Pownan Street,Valathy, Melmalaiyanur Taluk,Villupuram District 604 208. 3. S/o Pavunan, No.1, Pownan Street, Valathy, Melmalaiyanur Taluk, Villupuram District. Elango @ Elangovan 4. S/o Pavunan, No.1, Pownan Street, Valathy, Melmalaiyanur Taluk, Villupuram District. No.1, Pownan Street,Valathy, Melmalaiyanur Taluk,Villupuram District 604 208. 5. Vijayakumar @ Viji S/o Subramani, No. 108, Arasamara Street, Valathy, Melmalaiyanur Taluk, Villupuram District. ..Petitioners Vs Page2 of 6 The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Valathy Police Station, Villupuram. Crime No.115 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Crime No.115 of 2026 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, Valathy Police Station, Villupuram. For Petitioner(s): Mr. A Bharani Chandar For Respondent(s): MR.N.PALANIVEL, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)