Dhanapal vs The State Rep By The Sub-Inspector Of Police

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.08.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 118(1), 126(2), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS and subsequently it was altered into Section 109, 118(1), 126(2), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS Act, in Crime No.276 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioner along with two others were abused the de-facto complainant in filthy language and assaulted him by knife on his thigh and left elbow cause grievous injury. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case without any basis. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 09.08.2026 and that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation. He further submitted that the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.28461 of 2026, dated 05.10.2026. He also further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case, the petitioner and two others were absued the de-facto complainant and assaulted him cause grievous injury, the injured discharged from hospital and the investigation is pending. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only), with two sureties, for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Chinnasalem, and subject to the following conditions:

[a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.