Arulvalavan v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Arulvalavan S/o.Rajendran, No.1/264 Periyatheru , Vadaveekam,Thandalai, Ariyalur.

2. Amutha W/o.Rajendran, No.1/264 Periyatheru , Vadaveekam,Thandalai, Ariyalur.

3. Santhiya D/o.Rajendran, No.1/264 Periyatheru , Vadaveekam,Thandalai, Ariyalur.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by Inspector of Police, Jayankondam Police Station, Ariyalur District, Crime. No.137 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners/accused on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.137 of 2026 pending on the file of respondent police and thus render Justice.

For Petitioner(s):

M/s.Radha Pandian For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 118(2), 351(3), 75(1)(i) of BNS r/w. Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of women Harassment Act in Crime No.137 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to a property dispute, the petitioners trespassed into the de facto complainant's home, picked up a quarrel, and sexually assaulted the de facto complainant's wife and daughter, causing injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. 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 submitted that there is a case and case in counter and the FIR was registered on 13.03.2026 and that the

de facto complainant was compelled to be hospitalized for a period of 7 days. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 6.Considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioners and also considering the duration of the treatment taken by the de facto complainant, this Court is of the firm view that these petitioners do not deserve the grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24-03-2026 MPA To 1.The Inspector of Police, Jayankondam Police Station, Ariyalur District, Crime. No.137 of 2026 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MPA 24-03-2026