I.Charles Yesudas v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL. OP. No.673 of 2026 1.I.Charles Yesudas 2.I.Santhi ....Petitioners Vs The State Represented by Inspector of Police, W29-AWPS-AVADI Police Station Tiruvallur District Crime No.51 of 2025.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.51 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner: R.Sivakumar For Respondent: Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 506(1)- IPC 1860 in Crime No.51 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against these petitioners is that the first petitioner

is the husband of the defacto complainant and their marriage was solemnized on 19.01.2019 and subsequently there was a misunderstanding arose between them and further the petitioners had demanded huge amount from the defacto complainant for continuing the matrimonial life and also started to bad mouth about the victim girl. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the defacto complainant has relationship with some other person and when the same was objected by her husband, she lodged a false complaint on the petitioners. He further submitted that these petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation and also abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation in this case is still pending and hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on

record.

6. Considering the nature of allegations and the submissions made by learned counsel on either side and considering the fact that this is a case of matrimonial issue and investigation of case of this nature, custodial interrogation is not necessary, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamalleee, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) , with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

(a) 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 their identity;

(b) the petitioners shall report before the

K.RAJASEKAR, J., gv respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

12.01.2026 To

1. The Inspector of Police, W29-AWPS-AVADI Police Station Tiruvallur District 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. CRL OP NO.673 of 2026