M.Abishake @ Abiseck vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2667 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2667 Mad
Judgement Date : 20 May, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M.Abishake @ Abiseck vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ... on 20 May, 2026

Author: R.Vijayakumar

Bench: R.Vijayakumar

                                                                            CRL OP(MD). No. 9530 of 2026



                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

                                                   Date : 20.05.2026

                                                      PRESENT

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

                                            CRL OP(MD). No. 9530 of 2026


                     M.Abishake @ Abiseck                          ...Petitioner/Accused
                                                        Vs

                     State of Tamil Nadu rep. by
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Nerkuppai Police Station,
                     Sivagangai.
                     (Crime No. 50 of 2026)                          ...Respondent


                                     For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sri Ram
                                                      Advocate.
                                     For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James
                                                      Government Advocate (Crl.Side)


                           PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS

                     PRAYER :-

                          For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 50 of 2026 on the file of the
                     respondent police.

                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

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

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the

respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),

191(3), 296(b), 118(1), 131, 132, 125 & 351(3) of BNS, read with

Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss)

Act, 1922, in Crime No.50 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police,

seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that while the de-facto

complainant was sitting and talking with his friends, the petitioner, along

with the other accused, approached the de-facto complainant with

weapons, assaulted him, and threatened him as well as his friends with

dire consequences. They further caused damage to two vehicles

belonging to the de-facto complainant. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offences as

alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is

ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this

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

Court. He would further submit that some of the co-accused were

granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail

to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing

for the respondent police submitted that it is a case, case in counter. He

further submitted that due to a temple dispute, the accused persons

assaulted the de-facto complainant and others, threatened them, and

caused damage to the vehicles parked there. As a result, 21 persons were

injured, including one police officer. He also submitted that the injured

persons have been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed

the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the

fact that the issue pertains to a temple dispute, and that it is a case, case

in counter, and that the injured persons have already been discharged

from the hospital, and some of the co-accused were granted anticipatory

bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner,

subject to certain conditions.

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

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

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

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

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

learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari, within a

period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy was made

ready and on further conditions that:

[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 Aadhaar card

or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Inspector of

Police, Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai daily at 10.30

a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when

required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or

witness either during investigation or trial.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during

investigation or trial.

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

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

learned 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 is released

on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid

down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of

Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].