Sundaramoorthi v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Sundaramoorthi, S/o.Velayudham

2. Sathyamoorthi, S/o.Velayudham ... Petitioners Vs.

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jayankondam Road, Min Nagar, Ariyalur District - 621 704.

2. The State, Rep. By Inspector of Police, T.Palur Police station, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Ariyalur District - 612 904.

Cr.No.56/2026

3. Mrs. Pavalakodi, W/o.Arunagiri ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners/A1 and A2 on Anticipatory Bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.56 of 2026 on the file of the 2nd respondent police/Inspector of Police, T.Palur Police Station, Ariyalur for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 133, 303(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesulu For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) [R1 & R2] 1/4

ORDER

The petitioners, herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 133, 303(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in Crime No.56 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to personal animosity arising from a long-standing civil dispute, the petitioners abused the de-facto complainant in a filthy language and insulted her by referring to her caste. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the entire issue revolves around the land dispute and that even in the FIR, it had been stated only as land dispute, therefore, the very invocation of SC & ST case is illegal. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/4

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioners abused the de-facto complainant in a filthy language by user her caste name. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. While reading the FIR there is material to invoke the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 25.03.2026 mp 3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

mp To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jayankondam Road, Min Nagar, Ariyalur District - 621 704.

2. The Inspector of Police, T.Palur Police station, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Ariyalur District - 612 904.

Cr.No.56/2026 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.OP.No.7604 of 2026 25.03.2026 4/4