AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) BNS, in Crime No.493 of 2026, and seeks anticipatory bail.
The case of the prosecution is that a quarrel arose between A2, Thilaga, and the de-facto complainant over the destruction of a kolam on 25.07.2026. During the quarrel, the de-facto complainant allegedly pushed Thilaga, causing her to fall down. A1 and A3 intervened to rescue her. The petitioner contends that the complaint lodged against him is false. Hence, the case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and is also ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) opposed the grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the de-facto complainant had sustained a grievous injury, namely, a fracture of the left nasal bone. He further submitted that the investigation is still pending. Therefore, he contended that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.
I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and have also perused the records available on record.
Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the grievous injury sustained by the de-facto complainant, namely, a fracture of the left nasal bone, and the fact that the investigation is still pending, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.