Sakthivel v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN
1. Sakthivel
2. Santhosh
3. Dharmalingam ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Kuvagam Police station, Ariyalur District, Crime No.154 of 2025 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in connection in crime no.154 of 2025 on the file of respondent police and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
M/S. Balachandran T For Respondent(s):
Mr.N.Palanivel, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)
ORDER
The petitioners herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 140(1) & 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.154 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The allegation against the petitioners is that petitioners had a grudge against the defacto complainant for kidnapping their family member Sandhiya, leading to filing a habeas corpus petition, due to which, petitioners colluded, abducted the defacto complainant, harassed him and recorded video statements. Hence, the case.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the case registered against them was fabricated by the respondent police due to a case filed by the petitioners against the defacto complainant and there is also a specific allegations against the police personnel. He further submitted that the victim (Sandhya) has also been rescued. Therefore, the learned counsel seeks anticipatory bail for the petitioners.
4 .The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution's case and submitted that originally a man missing complaint was lodged. Subsequently, upon investigation, it revealed that these petitioners have abducted the defacto complainant and based on the statements recorded from the defacto complainant, a man missing case was altered and a new Crime No.154 of 2025 was registered, under Sections 127(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 140(1), 351(3) of BNS. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He further submitted that the petitioners have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl OP No.34188 of 2025 on
15.12.2025, but the petitioners have not executed the sureties as ordered by this Court.
5.Considering the nature of allegations alleged and other circumstances of the case and since custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not necessary for the case of this nature, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate cum District Munsif Court, Sendurai, Ariyalur District, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] the petitioners shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
11-06-2026 GBI To 1.The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Kuvagam Police station, Ariyalur District, Crime No.154 of 2025 2.The Judicial Magistrate cum District Munsif Court, Sendurai, Ariyalur District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
GBI 11-06-2026