Aswin v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
1. Aswin S/o. Narayanaperumal, No.5/250 South Gandhi Street, Canala, Kottivakkam, Thiruvanmaiyur, Chennai-600 041 and 4 Others
2. NarayanaPerumal S/o. Mohnadhas, 3/249 Pilakkavilai, Killiyoor, Vilanvancode , Kanniyakumari -629171 Chennai-115.
3. Helan Rani W/o Narayana Perumal, No,3/249, PillakkavilaiKilliyoor, Kanniyakumari -629171, Chennai-115.
4. Anisha Joyslin S/o. Narayana Perumal No.5/250 South Gandhi Street,Kottivakkam,Thiruvanmaiyur Chennai-41
5. Ponmukesh S/o. Somasundram, No,54/3 Melaminnappan Street, Woraiyur, Thiruchirappalli District.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The State Represented by The Inspector of Police Neelankarai Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No. 8 of 2026
Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner/Accused on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 8 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent Police J-8, Neelankarai Police Station, Chennai District and thus render Justice. For Petitioner(s):
M Sarathkumar For Respondent(s):
M/S.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 52, 108 of BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 8 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the 1st petitioner was having relationship with a victim girl aged about 20 years and promised to marry her and they developed a living-in relationship for some time. Subsequently, when she demanded marriage, he avoided and did not come forward to marry her. The de facto complainant lodged a separate complaint, which was pending before the All-Women Police Station, Tharamani. During the enquiry, the 1st petitioner asked the de facto complainant to come to his house. The victim went to the house and awaited the 1st petitioner. When the 1st petitioner arrived with his family members (the other petitioners), they abused her with filthy language. Unable to bear the insult and harassment, she jumped from the building, sustained grievous injuries, and was admitted to the hospital
for treatment. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that regarding the promise and refusal to marry, a complaint was already registered and its enquiry is pending before the All-Women Police Station, Tharamani, in which the 1st petitioner is also appearing. Subsequently, the victim girl came to the 1st petitioner's house, quarrelled with the family members, which resulted in a quarrel, and she jumped from the building. They did not instigate her to attempt suicide. Hence, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the injured is in a very serious condition and taking treatment in the ICU of a Government Hospital. Further, other offences have been added implicating all the petitioners for abuse, scolding, and threats, and the investigation is pending. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. I have gone through the FIR and other connected materials, which reveal that the 1st petitioner abused the defacto complainant and abetted her to commit suicide, and further, he joined with other accused abused her with filthy language and threatening her with dire consequences. Hence, I am of the view that the 1st petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this
petition is dismissed insofar as the 1st petitioner is concerned.
6. However, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners 2 to 5 with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners 2 to 5 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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Sholinganallur, Chengalpattu District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition:
(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions 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 v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
27-01-2026 Mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To
1. The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Sholinganallur, Chengalpattu District.
2.The State Represented by The Inspector of Police Neelankarai Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No. 8 of 2026 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR J.
mpa CRL OP No. 1033 of 27-01-2026