Bharani Kumar Vs The State Rep by Inspector of Police

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to grant Anticipatory Bail to the

¶15

Page1 of 6

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

CRL OP No. 16963 of 2026

¶18

petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Crime no.165 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶19

For Petitioner(s): Mr. Karunakaran G For Respondent(s): MS.R.S.INDIRA, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections

¶22

296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.165 of 2026 on

¶23

the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

¶24

The case of the prosecution is that on 14.06.2026 at about 9 pm at Semmozhi Nagar, Mulanur, due to vehicle parking issue, the petitioners herein allegedly abused the defcto complainant in filthy language, assaulted him and caused injuries and criminally intimidated him. Hence the case.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner are

¶26

innocent persons and they are falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the present complaint has been lodged only as a counter blast to the said incident and with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance and harass the petitioners. He further submitted that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that

¶27

Page2 of 6

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

CRL OP No. 16963 of 2026

¶30

may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶31

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that one previous case has been registered against the petitioner. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) further submitted that the defacto complainant and the petitioners are neighbours. She further submitted that owing to a dispute relating to the car parking, a wordy quarrel arose, in which the petitioners abused the defacto complainant with filthy language, and assaulted and caused injuries. It was further submitted that the defacto complainant was admitted to the hospital on 15.6.26 and discharged on 21.06.2026. Hence, the learned Government Advocate opposed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶32

5.This Court has considered the submissions made on either side.

¶33

Considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), it is seen that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are neighbours and that the occurrence appears to have arisen on account of a dispute relating to the parking of their vehicles. Having regard to the nature of the dispute and the fact that the injured was discharged from the hospital, this

¶34

Page3 of 6

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

CRL OP No. 16963 of 2026

¶37

Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

¶38

Accordingly, 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, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District, 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:

¶39

(a)If the petitioners 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;

¶40

(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;

¶41

(c) The petitioners shall appear before the respondent police at 10.30 am for the period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for the purpose of interrogation.

¶42

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned

¶43

__________ Page4 of 6

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

CRL OP No. 16963 of 2026

¶46

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 laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

¶47

(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

03-07-2026

JRS

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District.

¶52

2. The Inspector of Police Mulanur Police Station, Tiruppur District. Crime no.165 of 2026.