Muruganandam v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Muruganandam

2. Rajavarman

3. Elavarasi

4. Sivakumar

5. Lakshmi

6. Ezhilarasi ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station Nannilam, Tiruvarur District.

Crime No.06 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to grant an anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before any court in connection with the case in Crime No.06 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police herein.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.D.Lakshmipathy For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 191, 296(b), 318(ii), 318(a) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.06 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the first accused and the de facto complainant had developed a love affair from the year 2022. In due course, the first accused allegedly made a false promise to marry her and had a physical relationship with the victim. Thereafter, the first accused refused to marry the victim. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that since the petitioners are relatives and family members of the first accused, they have also been named as accused in the First Information Report. He further submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submits that based on a

false promise that the first accused will marry the victim, he had sexual intercourse with the victim. He further adduced a copy of the accident register, wherein it is stated that the de facto complainant is unmarried and pregnant. However, he fairly submitted that the injury sustained by the victim is simple in nature.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available.

6. According to the prosecution, A1 had sexual relationship with the de facto complainant. On a perusal of the First Information Report dated 21.02.2026, it is seen that except for the allegation that the petitioners assaulted the de facto complainant, there is no specific overt act attributed to them. Considering the fact that the de facto complainant sustained only simple injury and also taking note of the fact that the de facto complainant was discharged from the hospital on 22.02.2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, 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 on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Valangaiman, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a

bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned learned 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 1, 2 and 4 shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two 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 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

12-03-2026 rap

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Valangaiman.

2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station Nannilam, Tiruvarur District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 12-03-2026