Ramachandhiran v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

1. Ramachandhiran

2. Arul

3. Chitra

4. Prabhu

5. Divya ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Arambakkam Police Station, Thiruvallur.

(Cr.No.77 0f 2026) ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge on bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.77/2026 pending on the file of respondent and pass such other suitable orders and thus render justice For Petitioner(s):

Ms.R.S.Pavithra For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 126(2), 115(2),

and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women (TNPHW) Act, in Crime No.77 of 2026, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the case arises out of a land dispute and that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are close relatives. He further submits that the allegations of trespass and harassment are exaggerated to settle property scores. He would also submit that the petitioners are law-abiding citizens with no bad antecedents and are ready to abide by any conditions, specifically noting that petitioners 3 and 5 are women.

3. The case of the prosecution, as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), is that the petitioners trespassed into the defacto complainant's house, behaved in an improper manner, and compelled her to vacate the premises. It is further alleged that during the incident, the defacto complainant was pushed, resulting in she sustaining certain injuries.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

5. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, specifically that

the dispute appears to be of civil nature among relatives, and considering that Petitioners 3 and 5 are women, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned District Munsifcum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Gumidipoondi, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions that: [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 suretyship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] The petitioners 1, 2, and 4 shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders,

and the Petitioners 3 and 5 shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[d] The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police officer as and when required; [f] The petitioners shall give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, they will comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[g] The petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[h] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action 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];

[i] If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

28-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni To 1.The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Gumidipoondi. 2.The Inspector of Police, Arambakkam Police Station, Thiruvallur. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Jeni 28-04-2026