Sasikumar v. State Rep by Inspector of Police

ORDER `The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 296(b) 151(3) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No. 140 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that there was a dispute between both the families in respect of 7 cents of land. On 01.07.2026, the defacto complainant and his family members asked the petitioners to hand over the said 7 cents of land, which led to a quarrel between the parties. During the course of the quarrel, both parties allegedly took mud from the ground and attacked each other with their hands. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the fourth petitioner is a physically challenged person and that the defacto complainant's group alone assaulted the fourth petitioner and his son and also threw mud at them. The learned counsel further submitted that a case has already been registered against the defacto complainant's group in Crime No.138 of 2026, and, being aggrieved by the same, the present counter-complaint has been Page2 of 6 lodged against the petitioners. He would further submit that the petitioners are innocent and 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 prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that there was a land dispute between the parties and, during the occurrence, the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant and his family members. The investigation is still in progress, and the specific overt acts of the petitioners have to be probed. Hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be necessary, and therefore, she prayed for dismissal of the anticipatory bail petition.

¶5Considering the submissions made on either side, the fact that a case has already been registered against the defacto complainant's group in Crime No.138 of 2026 and that the present case appears to be a counter-case arising out of the same occurrence, this Court is of the view that the dispute arose out of a sudden quarrel relating to a property dispute. Taking note of the fact that the fourth petitioner is a physically challenged person and that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. Hence, this Court is inclined to Page3 of 6 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, Thirukoilur, 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 fifteen [15] days 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 Page4 of 6 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. 21-07-2026 JRS To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thirukoilur.

¶2TheInspector of Police Kandachipuram Police Station, Villupuram District. Crime No.140 of 2026

¶3The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. Page5 of 6 CRLoOPoNo.o19275oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. JRS CRLoOPoNo.o19275oofo2026 21-07-2026 Page6oofo6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.Sasikumar S/o. Devaraj, Maluvanthangal, Kandachipuram, Villupuram District. 2.Arun S/o. Sasikumar Maluvanthangal, Kandachipuram, Villupuram District. 3.Gopi S/o. Murugan Maluvanthangal, Kandachipuram, Villupuram District. 4.Anbalagan S/o Devaraj Maluvanthangal, Kandachipuram, Villupuram District. ..Petitioners Vs State rep by Inspector of Police Kandachipuram Police Station, Villupuram District. Crime No.140 of 2026 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on Page1 of 6 bial in the event of their arrest pending investigation in Crime No.140 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent police and thus render Justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.V Murugesan For Respondent(s): Mrs. R.S.Indira, government Advocate (crl.side)