CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 1. Bhuvaneshwaran 2. Leehari Harasudhan ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 & 2 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Keelavalavu Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No.177 of 202.. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.177 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner : V. Malaiyendran, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.I.Murugesan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 Sections 77, 115(2), 351(2) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.177 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner is ranked as A1 & A2, and it is alleged that while the defacto complainant's wife was taking a bath, one of the accused saw the same through the window, and hence, there was a quarrel arose between the parties, and hence, the accused attacked the defacto complainant's family members. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that there is a delay in registration of FIR and and the petitioners have no bad antecedents. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instruction, 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 reported that the investigation is at preliminary stage. He would further submitted that the case was registered, after conducting preliminary investigation, as such there is no delay occurred and there is a family dispute between the parties and the petitioners have no bad antecedents. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. I have gone through the FIR and also the connected materials available on records. 6.Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioners, and also considering the facts that the alleged occurrence took place on 16.06.2026 and the FIR was registered after delay of few days and the petitioners have no previous antecedent, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

7. 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 made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Melur, on condition that the petitioners 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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 06.00 p.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 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 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 29.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Melur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Keelavalavu Police Station, Madurai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12611 of 2026 Date : 29/06/2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 1. Bhuvaneshwaran 2. Leehari Harasudhan ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 & 2 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Keelavalavu Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No.177 of 202.. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.177 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner : V. Malaiyendran, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.I.Murugesan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 Sections 77, 115(2), 351(2) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.177 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner is ranked as A1 & A2, and it is alleged that while the defacto complainant's wife was taking a bath, one of the accused saw the same through the window, and hence, there was a quarrel arose between the parties, and hence, the accused attacked the defacto complainant's family members. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that there is a delay in registration of FIR and and the petitioners have no bad antecedents. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instruction, 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 reported that the investigation is at preliminary stage. He would further submitted that the case was registered, after conducting preliminary investigation, as such there is no delay occurred and there is a family dispute between the parties and the petitioners have no bad antecedents. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. I have gone through the FIR and also the connected materials available on records. 6.Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioners, and also considering the facts that the alleged occurrence took place on 16.06.2026 and the FIR was registered after delay of few days and the petitioners have no previous antecedent, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

7. 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 made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Melur, on condition that the petitioners 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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 06.00 p.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 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 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 29.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Melur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Keelavalavu Police Station, Madurai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.12611 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12611 of 2026 Date : 29/06/2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis