S.Ramkumar v. Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.1985 of 2026
1. S.Ramkumar
2. M.Perarasu
3. K.Sathose ... Petitioners Vs.
The Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Pennadam, Cuddalore District.
... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge this petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Cr.No.22 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Pennadam, Cuddalore District.
For Petitioners : Mr.A.Balaji For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 r/w 1/6
Under Section 191, 115(2), 131 of BNS 2023, in Crime No.9 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have participated in the pongal festival celebration in the nearby village, at that time, a wordy quarrel arose between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, due to which, the petitioners have abused, attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint has been lodged against the petitioners, pursuant to which the present petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation. Therefore, he prayed that anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition as against the third petitioner and has also made an endorsement to that effect.
5. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, there are no previous cases against them and investigation in this case is pending. Hence, he vehemently 2/6
opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the nature of the allegations and the injured has been discharged from the hospital, there are no previous cases against them and investigation in this case is pending, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1 and 2, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners 1 and 2 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, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tittagudi on condition that each of the petitioners petitioners 1 and 2 shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that: (a) If the petitioners 1 and 2 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, 3/6
2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioners 1 and 2 shall report before the respondent police daily 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 1 and 2 in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners1 and 2 released on anticipatory 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 Act.
8. In view of the submission and the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn as against the third petitioner. 29.01.2026 Vv 4/6
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Tittagudi
2. The Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Pennadam, Cuddalore District 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
5/6
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.1985 of 2026 29.01.2026 6/6