Gunaseelan v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.J.Gunaseelan 2.L.Balasundar ... Petitioners Vs.

The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Arni Taluk Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.Not Known of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.Not Known of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 324(4), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS 2023 (under Sections 294(b), 324, 1/6

425, 506(ii) of IPC) in Crime No.Not Known of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had agreed to sell a water plant to the de facto complainant, who is their relative, for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,90,00,000/-, out of which a sum of Rs.78,00,000/- was paid as advance. It is alleged that, after execution of the sale deed, the de facto complainant failed to pay the balance sale consideration and subsequently, when demanded, the petitioners threatened the de facto complainant and assaulted him, causing injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the occurrence took place in furtherance of the dispute arising out of non-payment of the balance sale consideration by 2/6

the de facto complainant. He further submitted that the occurrence took place on 12.02.2026, whereas the FIR was registered on 09.03.2026 in Crime No.109 of 2026.

5. Considering the fact that the entire issue revolves around a dispute relating to sale consideration and also considering the delay in registration of the FIR from the date of occurrence, apart from that this Court is also of the view that, at this length of time, no custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 Judicial Magistrate Court, Arni, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

3/6

(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 twice a day at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30 p.m., for a period of 15 days 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. 17.03.2026 cda 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Arni.

2.The Inspector of Police, Arni Taluk Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda 17.03.2026 6/6