K.Rajeesh vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2649 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2649 Mad
Judgement Date : 20 May, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

K.Rajeesh vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ... on 20 May, 2026

Author: R.Vijayakumar

Bench: R.Vijayakumar

                                                                     CRL OP(MD). No.9671 of 2026


                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              Dated : 20/05/2026

                                                   CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

                                          CRL OP(MD). No.9671 of 2026

                     K.Rajeesh                        ... Petitioner/Sole Accused

                                                      Vs

                     State of Tamilnadu Rep by,
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Pamban Police Station,
                     Ramanathapuram District.
                     Crime No.62 of 2026.               ... Respondent/Complainant

                     PRAYER :-

                        For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.62 of 2026 on the file of the
                     Respondent Police.


                       For Petitioner : M.Murugan,
                                 Advocate.
                       For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James,
                                 Government Advocate (Crl.Side)


                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

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

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the

respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(B), 115(2)

and 132 of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.62 of 2026 on the file of the

respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 03.05.2026, at about

06.00 p.m, the petitioner caused obstruction to traffic by parking his car

on the Pamban Bridge Highway. When the Highway Patrol Wing Head

Constables of the Rameswaram Highway Patrol Division, instructed him

to remove the car, he refused to do the same and abused them and

assaulted them. Hence, a case has been registered against the accused for

the aforesaid offences. Hence, this petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as

alleged by the prosecution and their names have been falsely implicated

in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits

that the petitioner obstructed the traffic and when the same was

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

questioned by the police personnel and also abused and attacked them

and prevented them from discharging their duty. Hence, he opposes to

grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that

the petitioner has no previous case.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, the

nature of the offences charged against the petitioner, and the fact that the

no previous case is pending against the petitioner, I am inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in

the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioner

shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand

only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the

Judicial Magistrate Court, Rameswaram, within a period of fifteen days

from the date on which the order copy is made ready and on further

conditions that:

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

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their

photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond

and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card

or Bank pass Book to ensure heir identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent

police once in a month ie., on first working day of every

month at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or

witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the

learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take

appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with

law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner

released on bail by the learned Magistrate / Trial Court

himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

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

P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].