AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
15 paragraphs · 647 wordsC.Kumarappan, J
The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.02.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 74, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.36 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
The case of the prosecution is that due to land dispute between the defacto complainant and the accused, the petitioners along with the other accused abused the defacto complainant and his family members in filthy language, assaulted them with sticks and stones and caused injuries to them. Hence, the case.
The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there was a land dispute between the defacto complainant and these petitioners and that due to altercation, according to the prosecution, these petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant sustained injuries and that he was admitted in the hospital. In furtherance of the attack made by the petitioners, they were remanded to judicial custody on 21.02.2026.
M/s.Lavanya, learned counsel for the defacto complainant would contend that the defacto complainant was in the hospital for a period of 30 days and that he has sustained head injury. She would also submit that the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.8468 of 2026 has obtained anticipatory bail in some other case which had arisen in respect of same nature of allegation. However, on 05.02.2026, on obtaining anticipatory bail, he has committed the present offence.
Though the learned Government Advocate reiterated the submission of the learned counsel for the defacto complainant, would fairly submit that investigation has been completed. He would further submit that according to the medical records, the injury sustained by the defacto complainant is simple in nature and he was discharged from the hospital. The learned Government Advocate, on instruction from the concerned police officials, would submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital within two days.
I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.
Taking into consideration of the totality of the circumstances and upon the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital within a period of two days and that the injury sustained by the injured is only simple in nature and that the petitioners have been under incarceration since 21.02.2026 and upon the further fact that investigation has already completed, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with certain stringent conditions:
Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing separate bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Attur, 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 petitioners shall stay at Coimbatore and report before the Inspector of Police, Ukkadam Police Station daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of 30 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioners 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 petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
